Full text of "KHRUSHCHEV IN AMERICA"

See other formats

KHRUSHCHEV

AMERICA

Full texts of the speeches made by

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV

Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR

on his tour of the United States

September 15-27, 1959

Translated from the book published in the USSR

entitled
IN PEACE AND FRIENDSHIP!"

CROSSCURRENTS PRESS
NEW YOR.K 1960

A copy of this material has been filed with the Department of Justice
where the registration statement of CROSSCURRENTS PRESS, INC., 33
West 42nd Street, New York 36, N. Y., as a publishing agency of
MEZHDUNARODNAYA KNIGA, Moscow, is available for inspection. Regis-
tration does not indicate approval or disapproval of this material by the
United States Government.

CONTENTS

Page
Preface 7

On the Eve of the Tour

On the Exchange of Visits Between N. S. Khrushcftev,
Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR,

and President Dwight D. Eisenhower of the USA 9

(Official Announcement Published on August 4, 1959)
N. S. Khrushchev's Reply to Letters and Telegrams
Received on the Eve of U.S. Tour 9

IN WASHINGTON September 15-16

N. S. Khrushchev's Speech at Andrews Field 13

N. S. Khrushchev's Speech at White House Dinner 15

N. S. Khrushchev Addresses Journalists at the National

Press Club 17

Question Period 26

Interview with Leaders of the U. S. Congress and

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 32

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at Dinner Given for

President Dwight D. Eisenhower ,. ..A.... 43

IN NEW YORK September 17-19

N. S. Khrushchev's Speech at the Luncheon Given by

Robert Wagner, Mayor of New York 46

N. S. Khrushchev's Speech at the Dinner Given in the

Economic Club of New York 51

Question Period 62

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at the Session of the

UN General Assembly 68

Declaration of the Soviet Government 87

General and Complete Disarmament is the Way to Deliver

Mankind from the Scourge of War 87

Program of General and Complete Disarmament 98

N. S. Khrushchev's Statement Before His Departure

from New York 102

IN LOS ANG1LES September 19

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at Luncheon Held at the

Twentieth Century Fox Studios 104

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at Reception Given by the
Municipal Authorities and the Association on
International Affairs of Los Angeles 113

IN SAN FRANCISCO September 20-21

N. S. Khrushchev's Speech 124

Meeting with U. S. Trade-Union Leaders 125

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at a Meeting with

Longshoremen of the Pacific Coast 140

N. S, Khrushchev's Speech at the IBM Corporation Plant

in San Jose 140

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at a Reception in San Francisco 142

IN IOWA September 22-23

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev on Arriving in Des Moines 152

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at the Reception in the

Des Moines Chamber of Commerce 153

N. S. Khrushchev's Speech Before Taking off from Des Moines ....163

IN PITTSBURGH September24

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev on Arriving in Pittsburgh 164

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at a Luncheon in Pittsburgh 164

IN WASHINGTON September 24-27

Meeting with a Group of Representatives of the U. S. Business

and Commercial World 177

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev at a Luncheon Given by

U. S. Secretary of State Christian Herter 187

Joint Soviet-American Communique 189

Press Conference in Washington 190

Replies to Questions 192

N. S. Khrushchev's Broadcast over U. S. Television 198

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev on His Departure from the USA ....207
To President Dwight D. Eisenhower of the United States

of America (Radiogram from the TC/-114 plane) 208

To His Excellency Nikita S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the

Council of Ministers of the Union of Soviet

Socialist Republics (Reply Radiogram) 208

IN MOSCOW September 28

Meeting of the People of Moscow in Honor of JV. S. Khrushchev's

Return to the Soviet Union 210

Speech by Y. N. Nikolayev 212

Speech by U. M. Trofimova 213

Speech by L. I. Sedov 215

Speech by L. M. Selivanova 216

Speech by N. S. Khrushchev 217

NDKITA S. KHRUSHCHEV
Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR

Cheers along the road for Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers Khrushchev.

PREFACE

KHRUSHCHEV IN AMERICA contains the full texts of the speeches
made by N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council of Ministers
of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, on his tour of the United
States, September 15-27, 1959. These speeches are translated from
the authoritative collection entitled LIVE IN PEACE AND FRIENDSHIP!
published and widely circulated in the Soviet Union.

The translation includes a condensation of explanatory material
from the Soviet book describing the place and circumstances of each
speech or discussion. The translation also contains several instances
of pointed editorial commentary on remarks made to Khrushchev
in question periods and discussions. These were written by and
express the opinions of the Soviet editors of LIVE IN PEACE AND
FRIENDSHIP! They are retained in order to convey accurately to
the reader the Soviet point of view on various aspects of the Khrush-
chev trip.

Khrushchev's American speeches constitute an historical docu-
ment of first-rate importance. They place before the reader Khrush-
chev the man, the political leader, the master of repartee and wit
They reflect the position of his government on a wide range of issues.
But most important of all, these speeches are the principal record
of a trip that has already exercised a profound influence on the
course of world affairs and perhaps opened a new and more hopeful
chapter in relations between the two powers on which the future
dependsthe United States and the Soviet Union.

The publisher takes pleasure in making available, in permanent
form, the record of this eventful trip.

New York, N. Y.
January 2, 1960

On the Eve of the Tour

ON THE EXCHANGE OF VISITS BETWEEN N. S. KHRUSHCHEV,
CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF THE USSR,
AND PRESIDENT DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER OF THE USA

(Official Announcement Published on August 4, 1959)

The President of the United States has invited N. S. Khrushchev,
Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, to make an
official visit to the United States in September 1959. N. S. Khrushchev
has accepted the invitation with pleasure.

The President has also accepted with pleasure the invitation of
N. S. Khrushchev to make an official visit to the USSR later in the
autumn of this year.

N. S. Khrushchev will spend two or three days in Washington
and will tour the United States for approximately ten days. He will
have unofficial talks with the president, which will present an oppor-
tunity for an exchange of opinions on problems of mutual interest.

During his tour of the United States, N. S. Khrushchev will have
an opportunity of personally seeing the country and its people and
getting acquainted with their life.

President Eisenhower will visit Moscow and will also spend
several days touring the Soviet Union. This will provide another
opportunity for unofficial talks and an exchange of opinions with
the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on problems
of mutual interest

During his tour of the Soviet Union President Eisenhower will
also have an opportunity of personally seeing the country and its
people and getting acquainted with their life.

Both governments express the hope that the forthcoming visits
will contribute to better understanding between the USA and the
USSR, and promote the cause of peace.

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S REPLY TO LETTERS AND TELEGRAMS
RECEIVED ON THE EVE OF U.S. TOUR

In connection with my visit to the United States of America I
have received many letters and telegrams from Soviet people and

from citizens of other countries, including Americans. These letters
and telegrams express the hope that my visit will serve to improve
relations between the USSR and the USA, and that the exchange
of views with Mr. Eisenhower, the President of the United States,
will be a good start in improving the international situation.

Mankind is now living in a wonderful time. It is a time when
science and technology, economy and culture are flourishing, when,
indeed, the fantastic is becoming reality. Our visit to the United
States coincides with two immensely important events: The world's
first space rocket has been successfully sent to the moon from the
earth by Soviet people, and the world's first atomic icebreaker, the
Lenin, has set out on her maiden voyage.

How many fantastic novels, tales and poems have been written
about flights to the moon! For ages people have dreamed of inter-
planetary flight, and at last we are about to see this daring dream
come true. For decades scientists have striven to build a ship which
could break her way to the North Pole, and at last such a ship has
been launched.

How can we, Soviet people and not only we, but all people of
good will help rejoicing and admiring the great feat of Soviet scien-
tists, engineers, technicians and workers, who calculated to the minute
and second and accomplished the marvelous flight of a rocket from
the earth to the moon. How can we help congratulating the Soviet
scientists, engineers, technicians and workers who built the world's
first atomic icebreaker, which will stay at sea for months, crushing
the ice of many centuries.

The exploit of the Soviet conquerors of outer space has ushered
in a new era, when man, possessing a most profound knowledge of
the laws of physics, chemistry, mathematics, astronomy and other
sciences, has created a force capable of sending a powerful spaceship
from the earth to another heavenly body, and of directing it exactly
to a predetermined point

Why were the Soviet people the first in the world to successfully
solve such a difficult and truly grandiose problem as sending a rocket
to the moon a problem with many unknowns? This triumph became
possible because these same Soviet people had with their own hands,
their heroic labor, in a historically short period, succeeded in solving
the supreme social problem. They have built a socialist society and
are confidently building communism.

The unparalleled flight of the Soviet rocket to the moon and
the launching of the atomic icebreaker Lenin convincingly show that,

acting upon the historic decisions of the Twenty-first Party Congress,
our people are successfully developing the material and technical
basis of communist society. Only people who deliberately close their
eyes and refuse to look reality in the face can doubt the boundless
possibilities for human progress offered by communism.

Soviet people are pleasantly stirred and tremendously impressed
by the news of the rocket flight to the moon. They are proud of their
scientists, engineers, technicians and workers, who were the first in
the world to send to the moon a container with scientific instruments
and an emblem with the coat of arms of the Soviet Union, thereby
whining priority for our country. Our priority, the Soviet Union's
priority, of the first successful rocket flight to the moon, is thus firmly
established.

We realize, of course, that the triumph of our space conquerors
is a feat of the entire Soviet people, a victory for the entire socialist
camp. It is an outstanding contribution to the development of world
science, an achievement of world significance.

The launching of the icebreaker Lenin, whose engines are now
being powered by atomic energy, is likewise of symbolic importance.
It is no mere coincidence that the Soviet people, who were the first
in the world to start up an atomic power station, should also be the
first to launch an atomic icebreaker. We have thereby again strik-
ingly demonstrated that the Soviet people are fully resolved to use
atomic energy for peaceful purposes.

Our atomic icebreaker Lenin will break not only the ice of
oceans, but also the ice of the cold war. She will blaze the road to
the minds and hearts of nations, calling upon them to turn from the
competition between states in the arms race to a competition in uses
of nuclear energy for man's weal, to warm his body and soul, to
create everything that he needs. We are ready to cooperate with all
nations in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and would be happy
if this call were taken up by all governments.

The scientists of the Soviet Union who built the rocket and sent
it to the moon have given me a replica of the emblem taken there
by the Soviet rocket I shall be happy to present this replica to the
President of the United States, Mr. Eisenhower. May this emblem
be a symbol calling on Soviet and American scientists, engineers and
workers, on our peoples to join their efforts in creative work, in the
struggle to improve relations between our countries, to win peace
among all the nations of the world.

I should like to assure my dear compatriots and everybody else
who has sent me friendly letters and telegrams in connection with my
visit to the USA, that for my part I shall make every effort to justify
your hopes. I do not doubt the good intentions of the President of
the USA. In inviting me to visit the United States, he, too, evidently
strives to find a common language for a settlement of controversial
international questions and an improvement of relations between
our countries.

Our main objective must be to secure peaceful conditions of life
for all people on earth.

I thank you, dear comrades and foreign friends, for your good

wishes.

N. KHRUSHCHEV

September 14, 1959

IN WASHINGTON September 15-16

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S SPEECH AT ANDREWS FIELD

N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers,
his family and his party arrived in the USA on an official visit on
September 15.

At Andrews Field near Washington N. S. Khrushchev, replying to
the welcome speech by U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, said:

MR. PRESIDENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

Allow me at this moment, as I step on American soil for the
first time, to thank Mr. Eisenhower for his invitation to visit your
country, and to thank all of you for the warm welcome you have
extended to us, representatives of the Soviet Union.

Russians say that "every good thing should be started in the
morning.** Our trip started this morning in Moscow, and we are happy
that our first meeting with you on American soil is taking place on
the morning of the same day. As you see, our countries are not so
very far away from each other.

It was with great pleasure and gratitude that I accepted the
invitation of the President of the USA to come to your country on
an official visit, and I shall be happy to talk with statesmen, business-
men, intellectuals, workers and farmers, and to acquaint myself with
the life of the industrious and enterprising American people.

For our part, we shall in the near future be happy to receive
Mr. Eisenhower, the members of his family and his party in the
Soviet Union. We shall accord the President a most cordial reception
and afford him every opportunity of seeing the life of the Soviet
people.

We have always held that mutual visits and meetings of govern-
ment representatives are useful Meetings and talks between states-
men of our two great countries the Soviet Union and the United
States are of special importance.

All nations are deeply interested in preserving and consolidating
peace, in peaceful coexistence. War augurs no good to anyone. Peace
is of benefit to all peoples. That, in our opinion, is the cardinal prin-

Welcome parade in honor of the arrival of Khrushchev in Washington.

ciple which statesmen of all countries should act upon in order to
meet the hopes of the peoples.

We have come to you with an open heart and with good inten-
tions. The Soviet people want to live in peace and friendship with
the American people. There is nothing to prevent the relations be-
tween our countries from being built up as relations between good
neighbors. The Soviet and American peoples, as well as other peo-
ples, fought well together against the common enemy during the
Second World War and crushed him. In peacetime we have more
grounds and greater opportunities for friendship and cooperation
between the peoples of our countries.

On the eve of our meeting with you, Mr. President, Soviet
scientists, engineers, technicians and workers gladdened us by launch-
ing a rocket to the moon. The path from the earth to the moon has
thus been blazed and a container weighing 390 kilograms, with a

device bearing the coat of arms of the Soviet Union, is now on the
moon. Our earth has now become somewhat lighter, and the moon
several hundred kilograms heavier. I am sure that this historic
achievement of peaceful Soviet science gladdens not only Soviet
people, but also all the people who value peace and friendship
between nations.

An atomic-powered icebreaker was launched in the Soviet
Union a few days ago. We rejoice at this concrete expression of the
desire of all peoples that nuclear energy be used for peaceful pur-
poses only. We know, Mr. President, that you hold dear the idea
of the peaceful utilization of nuclear energy, and note with satisfac-
tion that in this sphere your aims coincide with ours.

We do not doubt that the splendid scientists, engineers and
workers of the United States who are working to conquer outer space
will likewise deliver their emblem to the moon. The Soviet emblem,
as an old resident of the moon, will welcome your emblem, and they
will live in peace and friendship just as you and we on earth must
live in peace and friendship, and just as all the nations of our com-
mon Mother Earth, which rewards us so generously with her bounty,
must live in peace and friendship.

Permit me in these first minutes of our stay in the United States
to convey heartfelt greetings and very best wishes to the American
people from the peoples of the Soviet Union, from the Soviet Gov-
ernment and from myself.

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S SPEECH AT WHITE HOUSE DINNER

President Dwight D. Eisenhower of the USA and Mrs. Eisenhower
gave a dinner in honor of N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council
of Ministers of the USSR, and Madame Khrushchova on the evening
of September 15.

During the dinner President Dwight D. Eisenhower and N. S.
Khrushchev exchanged speeches.

MR. PRESIDENT, MRS. EISENHOWER, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I want to thank Mr. Eisenhower for his good wishes. We have
come to the United States with the best of intentions, at the Presi-
dent's invitation. We want to reach an understanding on improving
our relations. Our countries are very strong. They must not quarrel
with each other. If small countries quarrel, they can do little more,
to put it figuratively, than scratch each other. And in a day or two
cosmetics will efface the traces of that quarrel. But if strong coun-

tries were to quarrel, such as the United States and the Soviet Union,
it would not be our countries alone that would suffer enormous
damage, but other countries as well would inevitably be drawn into
a worldwide fray.

We are confident that our two states and our peoples can live
in friendship and work in common for an enduring peace. You have
mentioned the fact that it will soon be 150 years since diplomatic
relations were established between the United States and Russia.
I should also like to say a few words in this regard. I think that when
the U.S. Ambassador presented his credentials to Emperor Alexander
I, the Emperor did not trust him much, because the U.S. Ambassador
represented a republic, while Alexander I was an absolute monarch.
Yet, in spite of this, diplomatic relations were established between
our countries. There was mutual understanding between the United
States and Russia, and contacts between them grew stronger.

Our countries have never waged war against each other; indeed,
they have never had any major quarrels, with the exception of the
well-known events in the early years of Soviet power. Of course, I
don't lay claim to a profound knowledge of history, but I feel sure
that this is precisely how matters stand.

Now times have changed. Russia has changed. We believe that
our socialist system is better than yours. You think that your system
is better than ours. What are we to do? Should we extend the con-
troversy over whose system is better to a fight between us on the
battlefield? Would it not be better to let history settle the issue?
I think that would be more reasonable. If you agree with that, we
can build our relations on a basis of peace and friendship.

Yours is a rich and strong country. I have read many of your
speeches, gentlemen of the Senate and House of Representatives
present here. And although I have met you for the first time today,
you are old acquaintances of mine, thanks to your speeches.
(Animation.)

The time has come to stop and think, and to make every effort
to improve the relations between our countries.

We want nothing from you and you need nothing of what we
have. It is true that for the time being you are richer than we. But
We want to be as rich tomorrow as you are now, and richer still the
day after. (Animation.) And what is wrong with that? After all, we
want to earn it all by our own labor, not to take wealth away from
anyone. I must say that I was pleased with the meeting and exchange
of views we had with the President today. When some of our jour-

nalists approached me after the meeting and inquired about my
impressions, I told them that there would be a joint communique
and that they should go by what that communique said. But I could
not help telling them that I would inform my government that my
impression was good and that, in my opinion, a good beginning had
been made. God grant that the end may be better still

I should like to propose a toast to the health of the President,
to the health of his wife and to all of you esteemed ladies and
gentlemen. (Applause.)

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV MEETS JOURNALISTS
AT THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB

N. S. Khrushchev met American and foreign journalists at the
National Press Club in Washington on September 16.

JV. S, KHRUSHCHEV'S ADDRESS

MR, CHAIRMAN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I am pleased to meet prominent U.S. journalists at the beginning
of my visit I have had more than one occasion to see that journalists

President Eisenhower laughs heartily as Soviet Premier Khrusfa
chev gestures during a picture-taking session at the White House.

are very inquisitive people. They want to know everything about
everything at once and have a very lively imagination. I have received
so many questions that I would have to stay here six months to
answer all of them. How about that, would you object if I were to
stay here six months? Thank you in advance. But I must return to
Moscow to receive your esteemed President in our country.

In addressing you, I will do my best to satisfy your curiosity
and to tell you briefly about some problems connected with my U.S.
visit

In one of my talks with journalists in Moscow I called them my
traveling companions. Indeed, many of you will be my companions
on this tour of the United States. I should like you very much to be
good, active and objective companions. For it will be largely up to
you journalists to supply people with truthful information about our
stay in the United States. You will hear my interviews and speeches
and report them. I ask you ladies and gentlemen, to try to under-
stand me correctly and to report correctly what I say. If I should
happen to make a slip, ask me to repeat what I said and I will answer
you gladly, because I don't want a misconstrued word to clash with
what I meant to say and what I strive for.

I have been asked what results our visit may be expected to
produce. We arrived in the U.S. capital only yesterday. It would be
premature to try to anticipate the results of our trip. After all, even
in forecasting the next day's weather, the meteorological service
comes up against considerable difficulties, and political forecasts are
no less difficult But to judge by the first day of our meetings and
interviews in Washington, I would say that the barometer points to
"Fair.*

We have almost a fortnight before us. We will acquaint our-
selves with your country, with the life of your people, and will have
talks with President Eisenhower on matters of interest to both parties.
It has been long since I last met your President, whose outstanding
qualities are highly appreciated in the Soviet Union. We kept in
touch mainly through our Ambassadors or by exchanging messages.
But, of course, such contacts cannot replace personal contacts and
frank talk.

I am sure that you do not expect me to tell you all I have said,
or intend to say, to the President But I will have to tell you some-
thing, or you will not have a proper idea of the Soviet stand on the
major international issues.

First of all, I wish to stress that we have come to you with the
best of intentions and with an open heart. We have come with senti-
ments of friendship for the American people and a sincere desire to
achieve better relations between our two countries and promote peace
all over the world. That is the main object of our visit

We should like to reach an understanding with your government
on questions of vital importance. Such questions are many. But I
should, above all, like to mention the questions of relaxing inter-
national tension and eliminating the cold war, of disarmament, a
German peace treaty, world trade and better relations between our
countries.

I think the main subject of our talks with the President will be
the problem of eliminating the cold war and promoting peace, of
easing international tension. Recently your President said that
thought should be given to the question of how much longer the
arms race and the state of tension in international relations could
continue and whether the world had not reached a point where there
might be an explosion. We fully share the dissatisfaction with the
existing state of world affairs and the concern voiced in that statement

If we turn to history, we will note easily enough that so far,
unfortunately, wars and extermination of man by man have invaria-
bly accompanied human society. And although mankind had con-
tinuously advanced along the path of progress, wars became more
destructive with every step forward. They took an increasing toll of
human lives and their flames spread to larger and larger areas.

In the twentieth century mankind has already gone through
two world wars, and the sacrifice made in these wars is in no way
comparable to the past Now that man has learned to control the
energy of the atom and developed missiles capable of covering thou-
sands of kilometers in a matter of minutes, the best aircraft, battle-
ships and tanks used in the Second World War seem little more than
toys compared with the latest means of waging war. In these circum-
stances it would be sheer madness to allow a new world war to mature.

To preserve peace and rule out war from the life of society for
all time is the lofty goal which all peoples want to achieve. The
present age has produced new means of mass annihilation, but it has
also brought home to the peoples the necessity of preventing war
and ensuring peace. It is to this lofty goal that the powerful peace
movement has dedicated itself. We are convinced that in our day
war is not inevitable. Man can and must be relieved from fear of its
horrors.

The best and most dependable way of making war impossible
is to put all states, without exception, in a position in which they
will have no means of waging war, or, in other words, to solve the
disarmament problem. To be sure, disarmament affects the most
sensitive interests of states, the interests of their security, and invades
the sphere of such secret information as any state finds difficult to
part with, especially at a time of international tension and mutual
suspicions.

Without anticipating what I intend to submit to the General
Assembly the day after tomorrow, I can tell you that I intend to
concentrate on the disarmament problem. The Soviet Government
contemplates placing before the United Nations a proposal which
we hope will play an important part in settling the most crucial
problem of our time.

There are also other pressing international problems. You are
aware, of course, that the Soviet Union attaches great importance
to the conclusion of a peace treaty with Germany. It is high time,
once and for all, to settle issues inherited from the Second World
War, if we do not want to see the day when a third world war
breaks out

Why do we insist so strongly that a peace treaty be finally con-
cluded with Germany? We do so for the simple reason that the
absence of a peace treaty is poisoning the relations between dozens
of countries. Unless the vestiges of the last war are removed, it will
be impossible to provide for a durable peace in Europe. We cannot
be sure that these vestiges will not fertilize the soil for a new war.
I fully realize the importance of fertilizer in farming, but I am against
fertilizer of that sort in politics.

We are deeply convinced that the situation must not be tolerated
in which, fourteen years after the Second World War, the countries
which fought against Germany have not yet concluded peace with
that country, and, consequently, the occupation regime is still main-
tained in West Berlin.

There are Americans who sometimes reason as follows: Europe
is far away from us; there are two German states on the territory of
Germany, one of which is even an ally of the United States and, as
all know, there is no harm in having an extra ally. So, they say, we
can get along just as well without a peace treaty.

Pardon my saying so, but such reasoning is fit only for reckless
people. Judge for yourselves, your country has twice in the lifetime
of a single generation had to send its sons to battlefields in Europe

to fight against Germany. And what will happen if your present ally,
West Germany, provokes a third war? As matters stand today, it
would no longer be a question of sending the breadwinners of Amer-
ican families to theaters of war far removed from American shores.
The territory of any belligerent would become a theater of war.
Modern means of annihilation are such that war may spread instantly
to the entire globe.

You must understand that it is by no means for any fear of
the German militarists that we remind you of the dangers of not
having a peace treaty with Germany. We are strong enough to muzzle
the revanchists and, if necessary, to bring them to their senses. But
you will admit that there is no ignoring the fact that certain West
German groups are nurturing plans of bringing the Soviet Union into
conflict with other powers, of aggravating relations between them
and keeping the world in a state of international tension.

It is known that the postwar development of Europe and Ger-
many has led to the establishment of two German states. Both these
states exist irrespective of our wishes or our attitude to them. We
must reckon with that Realistic policy is the most correct policy. The
only thing to do is to accept the fact that there exist two German
states, that is, to recognize the status quo which has taken shape in
the German question, instead of dragging out the elimination of
the vestiges of the war, and to conclude peace with the two German

To admit of just one possibility the conclusion of a peace
treaty with a unified Germany only, which, to be sure, would be
tantamount, in effect, to dismissing the question of a peace treaty.

The conclusion of a peace treaty would also be instrumental in
ultimately settling a question such as that of Berlin, which is causing
continuous friction in the relations between the powers. It is alleged
sometimes that a year ago the Berlin question did not exist and that
the situation in Berlin was not bad. But must we really wait till
a seemingly insignificant incident in Berlin starts the guns barking?
We maintain that measures for the prevention of conflict should be
taken in good time.

Neither the Soviet Union nor the German Democratic Republic
has any hidden motives or secret designs on West Berlin. No one
wants to annex West Berlin to the German Democratic Republic,
any more than to change its social and economic order.

The communique" released after the talks between the heads of
government of the United States and the Federal Republic of Ger~

many late last month said that President Eisenhower had reaffirmed
'the pledge of the United States and its allies to protect the freedom
and welfare of the Berlin population." Very good, that formula
accords with our own intentions. The Soviet Union has declared that
the most reasonable thing to do in the present circumstances is to
proclaim West Berlin a free city. We have proposed in the past, and
propose now, that the independent existence of West Berlin be
ensured through the most reliable guarantees known in international
practice, with or without UN participation. That ought to assure the
freedom and welfare of the people of West Berlin.

We take it as a good sign that at the Geneva foreign ministers'
conference, the attitudes of the three Western Powers and the Soviet
Union came somewhat closer together and a better understanding
was achieved of each other's intentions and views. But there are still
some outstanding questions on which agreement has to be reached.
If I were to tell you that these questions will not be touched on dur-
ing the forthcoming conversations, you would not believe me anyway.

We know that the Americans are a freedom-loving people and
that they are prepared, as in the past, to stand up for their convic-
tions, for the right to live as they choose. The same sentiments are
dear to the Soviet people. Reserving this right for oneself, one cannot
deny it to others, whatever one's opinion as to whose political and
social system is better. The peoples must decide the question of how
to live, what ideology, what views to adhere to on their own, without
outside interference.

The Soviet Union is for the development of international rela-
tions along the principles of peaceful coexistence. These principles
were bequeathed to us by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the great founder
of the Soviet state. And we are faithful to these principles. We hold
that differences in world outlook should not impair relations between
countries. Close economic and cultural contacts should be established
among all countries. That will help nations and statesmen to know
and understand one another better. It will facilitate the establishment
of mutual trust and peaceful cooperation.

The Soviet Union and the United States are faced with the
choice either of having the latest achievements of scientific and tech-
nological thought the discovery of the secret of the atom, the making
of rockets and the penetration into outer space placed at the service
of man's peaceful future and prosperity, or of seeing them used for
purposes of destruction and annihilation, so that, as a result, the earth
will be covered with graves and ashes.

Khrushchev speaking at the National Press Club in Washington.

The Soviet people have long since made their choice in favor
of peace.

Is this not conclusively attested to by such facts as the building
in the Soviet Union of the world's first atomic power station, which
for five years now has been supplying power for peaceful uses, or
the launching into outer space of the world's first artificial earth
satellites and the first artificial planet, made and fired into the uni-
verse by man's genius?

Is this not attested to by the outstanding success of Soviet
scientists, engineers, technicians and workers who prepared and ac-
complished the world's first space trip from the earth to another
heavenly body, the moon? A powerful container with scientific and
measuring instruments and pennants displaying the Soviet coat of
arms have been delivered to the surface of the moon. This peaceful
feat of the Soviet people greatly extends the horizons of human
knowledge and shows what glittering heights mankind will reach if

it concentrates all its energy on peaceful pursuits, on the achieve-
ment of peaceful aims.

Before we left for the United States a mighty atom-powered
icebreaker, the Lenin, was launched She will soon begin to crush the
thick ice of northern seas, clearing the way for peaceful ships carry-
ing most peaceful cargoes for peaceful people.

We are certain that the American people, too, are for peace. But
if our interests coincide in the key issue the problem of guaranteeing
peace we should fall into step and work, joining our efforts and
energy, for a decisive change in the international climate. Let us,
therefore, see how we can establish Soviet-American cooperation.

As far as the Soviet Union is concerned, it is prepared to con-
sider any proposals likely to promote the establishment of good-
neighbor relations between the USSR and the USA. This, of course,
calls for an effort by both parties, or, as people say in your country,
both parties must meet each other halfway.

To be sure, this cannot be done overnight; it would be naive to
expect that we could wake up one morning to find all controversial
issues settled and all differences removed The .misunderstandings
and prejudices born of the cold war are too numerous. But the Soviet
Government believes that if we work together with a will, it will be
quite possible to disperse the dark clouds in the relations between
our countries.

Compare the present international situation with what it was,
say, five or six years ago. There are unmistakable signs of a relaxa-
tion of the cold war. The cold war must be helped to disappear as
quickly as possible. The press, which has apparently not for nothing
been called a great power, could do a great deal towards this goal.

The Soviet people are happy to see that there have recently
been signs of improvement in Soviet-American relations. Among
other things, I have in mind the development of personal contacts
between statesmen, such as the U.S. visits of A I. Mikoyan and
F. R. Kozlov, and Vice-President Richard Nixon's visit to the Soviet
Union. The Soviet Exhibition in New York and the American Exhibi-
tion in Moscow were another big event I had the pleasure of visiting
your exhibition with Mr. Richard Nixon. There the two of us had
heated and useful discussions.

We are also prepared to do everything we can for the expansion
of world trade. It is high time to do away with the discredited policy
of trade discrimination and thereby clear the atmosphere in interna-
tional relations.

How can the present volume of Soviet-American trade, for ex-
ample, be considered normal? All the commodities which our two
countries exchange in a year could be loaded on two freighters. Yet
our two countries account for more than half the world's industrial
output. We may ask what purpose is achieved by the policy of trade
discrimination, what object it serves. To take a sober view of things,
it is a policy that only serves one purpose that of maintaining dis-
trust in the relations between our countries.

Trade is like a barometer. It shows the trend in political devel-
opment whether clouds are gathering as before a storm or whether
it will be fair and fine. We sincerely hope the barometer will always
point to "Fair," and this, we are deeply convinced, requires all-around
expansion of international trade.

What else prevents us from achieving mutual understanding
and trust?

It may seem strange, but in connection with this exchange of
visits between the U.S. President and myself fears have been voiced
that the Soviet Union, while declaring its readiness to put relations
with the USA on a sound basis, is allegedly hatching some insidious
scheme, seeking to sow discord between the United States and its
friends and allies. There is no need for me to go into detail, because
these allegations are utterly absurd. We have no intention of making
anyone quarrel with anyone else. On the contrary, we are doing our
best to have good relations not only with the United States, but also
with its allies. We should like personal contacts between Soviet and
U.S. statesmen to contribute, in turn, to a further improvement of
relations between the Soviet Union and Great Britain, the Soviet
Union and France and other U.S. allies.

An exchange of opinions between the Soviet and U.S. Govern-
ments will not, and cannot, do any harm to those who are sincerely
interested in an improvement of the international situation. If, as a
result of this exchange of opinions, the USSR and USA come to
understand each other better and to show greater pliancy in settling
controversial matters, both the large and the small countries of
Europe, Asia and the other continents will benefit by it, and the cause
of peace will benefit most of all

We are not pursuing a policy of plotting with the strong against
the weak. We want to reach an understanding with the strong and
thereby to reach an understanding with all countries about eliminat-
ing the cold war. That would be an equal gain and an equal benefit
for all countries.

I have already said that we came to your country with an open
heart. We are here not to ask for anything or impose anything on
you. Our purpose is to acquaint ourselves with your country and its
great people, who have made a tremendous contribution to human
progress, to meet your statesmen, public leaders and businessmen, to
have useful talks on all matters that concern the peoples of our
countries and all mankind.

It is my hope that the U.S. newspapers and magazines, radio
and television will convey our friendly greetings to the American
people, our wishes for peace and happiness to all Americans from all
the Soviet people, from myself and from those accompanying me.

Thank you.

JY. S. Khrushchev's address was listened to with great attention.
His concluding words were received with vigorous applause.

QUESTION PERIOD

After N. S. Khrushchev had concluded his address, William
Lawrence, Chairman of the National Press Club, suggested passing
on to the question period.

The first question, relating to the J. V. Stalin personality cult,
was considered by the speaker to be of a plainly provocative nature.
In answering it, N. S. Khrushchev said:

I should like to ask those who have thought up this question:
What was their aim, what were they after, what did they want, when
they were inventing it, when thinking it up? You apparently want
to place me in an embarrassing position, and are laughing before-
hand. The Russians say, "He laughs best who laughs last" Gentle-
men, inventing all sorts of absurd figments, though you may now
be laughing and thinking how clever you are at inventing, see that
you don't repent your own inventions afterward.

I will not be provoked and will not reply with unfriendly sallies
against the many worthy representatives of the U.S. press gathered
here. I will only add that a lie, however long its legs, can never keep
pace with the truth. (Applause.)

QUESTION: Was it only a coincidence that the Soviet Union
sent a rocket to the moon on the eve of your arrival here, and a
related question: Does the sending of the emblem indicate any desire
to claim possession of the moon?

KHRUSHCHEV: The coincidence of my trip to the United
States with the sending of a Soviet rocket to the moon is a mere,

but I would say a pleasant, coincidence. (Laughter.) If anyone among
you doubts that it was a coincidence, I would suggest that he ask
your scientists let your scientists tell him about it Try and tell your
scientists to time the launching of a moon rocket to such-and-such
a date, and see what comes of it. (Laughter, applause.)

And now, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to answer the
second part of the question whether the delivery of a pennant to
the moon gives the Soviet Union cause for any sort of proprietary
claim to the moon. Let there be no mistake I have no wish to hurt
anyone's feelings but we are people of different continents and dif-
ferent ways of thinking.

Those who put the question in that way think in terms of private
capitalist psychology, while I belong to the socialist system and am
a man of a new world outlook and new concepts. In our country, the
concept "mine" is withering away, while a new concept, "ours," is
gaining ground. That is why we regard the launching of a space rocket
and the delivery of our pennant to the moon as our achievement
And when we say "our," we imply all the countries of the world, that
is, we imply that it is also your achievement and the achievement
of all people living on earth. (Applause.)

QUESTION: What are the major possibilities for increasing trade
between the United States and the Soviet Union, particularly in
consumer goods? In brief, what particularly do you want to buy from
us and what particularly do you wish to sell to us?

KHRUSHCHEV: What we want most particularly is an end to
trade discrimination. That is the most important thing. All that you
can make we can make too, and we have made some things before
you. (Laughter.) We do not ask for anything. You are today turning
out some goods in greater quantities than we, but that is due to
historical circumstances. Your country took the path of capitalist
development much earlier than ours, and you consequently devel-
oped your economy more than pre-Revolutionary Russia did. But
you know that great changes have now occurred in the development
of our economy. We are still some way off, some distance away from
you. But we are now closing in like this (animation in the audience
as Khrushchev demonstrates with his hands how the distance Be-
tween the U.S. economy and that of the Soviet Union is shrinking),
and I think the day is not far distant when we will change places
like this in that movement. We are catching up with you in economic
progress, and the time is not far distant when we will move into
the lead.

I want to tell you that I did not come to the United States with
a long arm to dig my hand into your banks. That is yours. We have
enough of our own. (Laughter.) I am not going to hold out my hat so
that everyone may throw into it what he thinks he can spare. (. Ani-
mation.) We are proud of our system, our people, our state and our
achievements. We want to be good trading partners with you, and
with all other countries. As for expanding trade between our coun-
tries, the way we see it, we should buy what we need and you should
sell what you think you can.

I do not now propose to hold specific trade negotiations. I did
not take along anyone from the Ministry of Foreign Trade quite
deliberately, so that none would think that I had come with a long
arm to rich Uncle Sam. (Laughter.)

If you show any desire to expand trade, then there will be
Soviet representatives on hand to reach concrete agreement on the
matter. They will then speak specifically of what you can sell and
what we should like to buy from you.

QUESTION: In your opening remarks, Mr. Khrushchev, you
spoke about avoiding outside interference in the affairs of other
nations. How, then, do you justify Russian armed interference in
Hungary?

KHRUSHCHEV: The so-called Hungarian question, you see, has
stuck like a dead rat in the throat of some people they are dis-
gusted with it and yet cannot spit it out (Laughter.) If you want to
give our talk that particular twist, I can produce quite a few dead
cats. They will be fresher than the question of the Hungarian events.

As regards Hungary, I have spoken about it quite exhaustively
in public on many occasions. I was particularly pleased and gratified
to answer before the Hungarian people when I was in Hungary as
a guest, representing our valiant Soviet Union. It was shortly after
the Hungarian events. All Hungary applauded us, and I know of no
fuller or better way in which the Hungarians could have expressed
their true attitude toward the Soviet Union. We have long since
settled all matters with Hungary and are advancing triumphantly
shoulder to shoulder. They are building socialism and we are build-
ing communism. Our goals coincide our path is one and so is our
goal.

I can add that I will not ask you any counter-questions of this
kind, because I have come to the United States with other aims,
because I've come with good intentions and an open heart. I have
come here, not to dig up various questions so as to aggravate rela-

Lions between our two countries, between our governments, but to
Improve existing relations, to remove, if I may say so, the road blocks
that hinder a rapprochement of our countries. That is why I don't
want to do anything that might conflict with that main objective
improvement of relations between our countries and cessation of the
state of cold war anything that might obstruct the establishment
of friendship and the promotion of world peace.

QUESTION: While you are here, Mr. Chairman, will you seek
to arrange with President Eisenhower a United States-Soviet civil
air agreement to exchange airline operating rights?

KHRUSHCHEV: That is a very concrete question and, of course,
it is not on the agenda of our conversations, because it is a
minor question and a specific one. But we would be prepared to
establish air communications between our two countries. Our coun-
try has air communications with many countries of Europe and Asia.
If the U.S. Government should wish to reach such an agreement, I
hardly think that we the President and I, Chairman of the Council
of Ministers need handle it. Our Ministers can do it

QUESTION: We are always anxious to get a little advance news
too, Mr. Khrushchev. What is your time schedule for throwing a
man to the moon?

KHRUSHCHEV: You used a rather unfortunate phrase when you
said 'throwing a man." We are not going to "throw" a man, because
we value man highly and will not "throw" anyone. We will send a
man into outer space when appropriate technical conditions have
been developed. There are still no such conditions on hand. We don't
want to "throw" anyone in the sense, so to say, of throwing him over-
board. We value people.

QUESTION: Would Russia be willing to share with Canada and
the United States, her Arctic neighbors, the information which Rus-
sian scientists have obtained in their extensive and successful Arctic
explorations?

KHRUSHCHEV: I think so. All countries should cooperate in the
matter. That would be useful Generally speaking, we oppose all
kinds of monopoly. (Laughter, applause.)

QUESTION: What is the purpose of your visit to Peking after
your American tour?

KHRUSHCHEV: That is apparently the most "difficult" question.
(Laughter.) Comrades I beg your pardon, there are both "com-
rades" and "gentlemen" here. (Laughter,) Habit tells. Besides, our
Soviet journalists are present here, whom it is our custom to address

with the word "comrades." It is the usual form of address. Further-
more, I do not want to waive the supposition that among you, too,
there are those who would not object to my calling them "comrades."
(Animation.) And so, I am addressing you gentlemen. (Laughter.)
I think that journalists not only write, but also read. (Laughter.)
If journalists do read, they should recall that on October 1, 1959,
it will be ten years since state power was won by the American
here you are; now you will say, "See what Khrushchev is thinking
about (laughter), we've caught him red-handed" (laughter) since
state power was won by the Chinese working class and China's work-
ing peasantry. It will be ten years since people's rule was established
in China. The Chinese people solemnly celebrate this day and we,
too, celebrate this holiday of our friends. We believe, for example,
that there may come a time when a new era will be computed from
the day of the October Revolution. But that is a thing of the future
The Chinese, too, treasure their victory and we respect their love
of their achievements. When the Chinese People's Republic cele-
brated its fifth anniversary, I headed the Soviet delegation at the
festivities in Peking. We have now been invited by the Chinese Gov-
ernment to send a delegation to the celebration of the tenth anni-
versary as well. It so happens that I must be back in the Soviet
Union on September 28 and fly to Peking the next day. It will be a
strain on me, of course, but I think it will also be a great honor to
be among our friends in China. The Soviet delegation will leave for
the Chinese People's Republic before my return to Moscow. In mv
absence it will be led by Comrade Suslov.

QUESTION: Mr. Chairman, can you summarize for us in your
speech today, have you offered any specifically new proposals that
have not been put forward before for easing world tension?

KHRUSHCHEV: We must first settle those questions that have
already been brought up and await settlement. Thinking up new
questions while the old ones have yet to be settled would mean
evading the solution of cardinal problems. If I am told that I have
not raised any new questions in my speech, I will agree. It would
not be out of place at this point to recall the Russian saying: Repe-
tition is the mother of learning. We will work hard to remove the
obstacles hindering a rapprochement of peoples and to put out the
sparks that may set off the frames of war. Those sparks must be
stamped out by all means and pressing issues must be settled, so
that peace can be assured for all nations.

QUESTION: There is great interest here, Mr. Khrushchev, in the

ituation of the various nationalities, including the Jewish popula-
ion, in the Soviet Union. Can you say a few words for us on that
core?

KHRUSHCHEV: In the Soviet Union there is no national question
n the sense in which you understand it All nationalities live in
riendship and all have equal rights. In our country, the attitude
oward anyone is not determined by his nationality or his religion.
That is a matter for every man's own conscience. We look upon a
nan primarily as a man. In our country, all nationalities Russians,
Jkrainians, Turkmens, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Byelorussians, Georgians,
Armenians, Kalmyks, Jews if I were to list all the peoples of the
Soviet Union, it would take more time than has been set apart for
his press conference they all live in peace and harmony. We are
>roud of the fact that a multinational state such as the Soviet Union
s solid and is making good progress. All the peoples of our country
rust each other and are advancing shoulder to shoulder toward their
:ommon goal, communism. The position of our country's Jewish
3Opulation, for example, is characterized, among other things, by the
following fact: Jews hold a worthy place among those who made
he successful launching of the moon rocket possible.

QUESTION: It is frequently attributed to you, Mr. Khrushchev,
ihat at a diplomatic reception you said that you would bury us.
[f you didn't say it, you could deny it; and if you did say it, could
pou please explain what you meant?

'" KHRUSHCHEV: There is only a small section of the American
people in this hall. My life would be too short to bury every one
:>f you if this were to occur to me. (Laughter.) I did speak about
it, but my statement has been deliberately misconstrued. It was not
a question of any physical burial of anyone at any time but of how
the social system changes in the course of the historical progress
rf society. Every educated person knows that there is now more
than one social system in the world. The various states, the various
peoples have different systems. The social system changes as society
develops. There was the feudal system. It was superseded by capi-
talism. Capitalism was more progressive than feudalism. Capitalism^
:reated better conditions than feudalism for the development of the
productive forces. But capitalism engendered irreconcilable contra-
dictions. As it outlives itself, every system gives birth to its successors.
Capitalism, as Marx, Engels and Lenin have proved, will be suc-
ceeded by communism. We believe in that. Many of you do not.
But among you, too, there are people who believe in that

At the reception concerned, I said that in the course of historical
progress and in the historical sense, capitalism would be buried and
communism would come to replace capitalism. You will say that this
is out of the question. But then the feudal lords burned at the stake
those who fought against feudalism and yet capitalism won out
Capitalism fights against communism. I am convinced that the winner
will be communism, a social system which creates better conditions
for the development of a country's productive forces, enables every
individual to prove his worth and guarantees complete freedom for
society, for every member of society. You may disagpwte with me. I
disagree with you. What are we to do, then? We pust coexist Live
on under capitalism, and we will build communism. The new and
progressive will win; and the old and moribund wifl die. You believe
that the capitalist system is more productive, that it creates better
conditions for social progress, that it will win. But the brief history
of our Soviet state does not speak in favor of capitalism. What place
did Russia hold for economic development before the Revolution?
She was backward and illiterate. And now we have a powerful econ-
omy, our science and culture are highly developed

I don't recall just how many engineers we graduate annually

V. P. YELUTIN*: Last year 94,000 engineers were graduated and
106,000 this year, or three times as many as in the United States.

KHRUSHCHEV: Some say in your country that if the USSR will
have more scientists, we will perish. We are willing to "perish" in that
sense, we are seeing to it that there are more scientists in our
country, that all our people are educated, because communism can-
not be built unless we do so. Communism is a scienca

Thank you. (Stormy, prolonged applause.)

In conclusion William Lawrence, Chairman of the National Press Club, on
behalf of the club's members, thanked N. S. Khrushchev for his address and
replies to questions.

INTERVIEW WITH LEADERS OF THE U.S. CONGRESS

AND MEMBERS OF THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE

September 16, 1959

On September 16, N. S. Khrushchev visited the U.S. Congress
at the invitation of Senator J. W. Fulbright, Chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee. The meeting was attended by 25 Sen-
*Minister of Higher Education of the USSR.

ators leaders of Congress and members of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee.

In his opening remarks, Fulbright welcomed N. S. Khrushchev,
Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. **We are glad
to see you here," he said, "and are glad that you are going to talk
with the President on important matters pertaining to the relations
between our countries. The Soviet Union and the United States are
strong powers. The Soviet people and the Americans are gifted
people. The possibilities of our countries are unlimited." Fulbright
stressed that armaments reduction and peaceful coexistence would
help to promote jj^ace and security and to raise the Mving standards
of all peoples. "I want to assure you," he went on, "that our people,
like your own, do not want war. We must find ways of ruling out
the possibility of war resulting from some accident and must provide
ways of peaceful economic competition.**

N. S. Khrushchev thanked Fulbright for his invitation to meet
Congressional leaders and members of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee.

"I fully agree with everything you have just said/* N. S. Khrush-
chev continued "You, gentlemen of the Senate, hold a position of
responsibility, and the trend in the policies of so powerful a state
as the United States depends largely on you. I always follow your
speeches with attention and know many of you from them. Now we
have met in person. You will not be surprised if I say that I do not
subscribe to everything you say in your speeches. There is a Russian
saying: 'Break bread with me, but speak your mind.' But let us not
now begin recollecting when and which Senator said something
bad or something good. That is a thing of the past. Let us take
guidance in political wisdom and think of the future, of how to guar-
antee peace and the security of nations.

"We Soviet people always think highly of the achievements of
the American people, rejoice in these achievements, are a little
envious at times, and want first to bring our economy level with
yours, then gather strength and outstrip you. I think our peoples
and future generations would be grateful to both of us if we shifted
our efforts from the arms race to competition in developing economy
and culture, and raising living standards. We are willing, I think
this problem can be solved only if prejudices are given up and a
new course is adopted without hesitation a course of friendship and
cooperation.

"I realize that it is not always easy to change the trend in

relations between states, discard the old or obsolescent and- adopt
the new and progressive. Here is an example from everyday reality:
Sometimes an elderly 'man puts on a new pair of shoes and wears
them 1 " for a while, but then flings them off and puts on the old pair.
The new pair hurts his corns, while he is accustomed to the old one
which seems to fit better. It is sometimes the same in human society.
Some people are apt to reject the new and try to preserve the old.

"Here is another example: You expect a daughter but your wife
gives birth to a son, or while you expect a granddaughter, a grandson
is born. You are disappointed, of course, but it cannot be helped,
nature doesn't always comply with man's will. (Animation.)

"The peoples have always fought for progress. In all the devel-
oped countries, revolutions occurred in one form or another when
the need arose to pass from feudalism to capitalism. When you
fought for your independence against Britain, whose colony the
United States was, the British king did not send you messages of
greeting and you won your independence in an armed struggle. The
Civil War which the North waged against the South was also a
progressive struggle, and the name of Lincoln, who led that struggle
for man's freedom, will live through the ages.

"A new social system, the socialist system, is being born now.
At first socialism won in one country, Russia; now it has triumphed
in many countries of Europe and Asia

"You do not accept this system, but I have already said that
when you want a grandson and a granddaughter is born instead, there
is nothing you can do about it Still less does the rise of a new system
in any country depend on the will of other countries. If everybody
recognizes the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of
other countries, which means recognizing the right of the people in
each country to choose the political organization, the system they
prefer, then universal peace will be assured. That is all we want

'We have all we need for the expansion of our economy and
do not covet the riches of other countries. Today we are successfully
building communism. Other peoples who have taken the path of
socialist development have by their experience also borne out the
theoretical forecasts of scientific communism. We consider commu-
nism to be the best system for us. We do not ask for your approval.
What we want is not to be interfered with.

"Changes in social formation in human society are not a process
that occurs in all countries simultaneously. When and how the social
system of a country changes is the affair of its own people. Recognize

CAafrman Khrushchev and President Eisenhower in Washington.

this, and peace will be assured If you do not recognize it, war will be
unavoidable. If you are going to seek a forcible change in the system
of other countries, the peoples of those countries will naturally have
to defend themselves. And that will mean war!

"Allow me to take this opportunity of making a few critical
remarks about you. I should like to state frankly that the decision
of your Congress to appropriate funds for subversive activities in the
socialist countries does not further peaceful coexistence and the cause
of peace. It is an unwise decision. What is more, to use the manufac-
turer's phrase, it is not a profitable enterprise; the invested capital
is yielding no interest in this particular instance. (Animation.)

"I don't want to sound didactic the policy you make is your
own responsibility. I don't know whether you permit your guests to
express their views, but we in the Soviet Union welcome it when
our visitors speak their mind, even if we disagree with them.

"Thank you. In conclusion, I want to stress once more that all we
want is peace and friendship with the American people and with
all the peoples of the world. Let us do a good thing, the responsibility
resting on us is great and we must live up to the expectations of the
peoples. And the peoples want just one thing peace. If you like
your capitalist system, carry on as you have done so far, and God
be with you. As for us, we like the socialist system, so don't interfere
with our living as we choose.

"There was a time when people were burned at the stake be-
cause they insisted that the earth revolved. But today you will not
find a simpleton who would not believe it. Why will you not admit,
then, that your present views of communism may be wrong? But,
I repeat, that is your affair. Let us recognize the status quo* there
exist socialist and capitalist countries in the world, so let us live in
this existing world of ours on the basis of peaceful coexistence.

"Since I was the first to make some critical remarks about you,
I thereby gave you a chance to do likewise. I am willing to hear your
criticisms and to reply to them, and also to answer any questions you
may ask" (Applause.)

Fulbright said fliat he liked N. S. Khrushchev's remarks. He
said it was frank talk and they were pleased to have such a talk
Speaking of N. S. Khrushchev's remarks about Congress appropriat-
ing funds for subversive activities, Fulbright contradicted the remark,
saying that "we interpret words differently." "We don't think it is so,"
said Fulbright, **we don't want to interfere in the internal affairs of

other countries. On the contrary, we have, for example, given the
Philippines a chance to win freedom. But I say that in passing."

Fulbright then accused some socialist countries of "trying to
impose their regime on others by force."

"When discussing a meeting with your President," N. S. Khrush-
chev replied, "we agreed to talk about the relations between our two
countries. Neither he nor I have been empowered to speak for any
third country. If you have any complaints against a socialist country,
negotiate with it, apply directly to its government Go-betweens are
undesirable in matters such as this. I represent the Soviet Union here
and am willing to answer any question that concerns the Soviet
Union."

"One more question," Fulbright said. "You are convinced that
your system is better than ours *

"Absolutely convinced," N. S. Khrushchev replied

"But what happens," Fulbright continued, "if it suddenly devel-
ops that the capitalist system is better and that more and more
people prefer capitalism to socialism? Will you put up with that,
or will you use force to hold your positions?"

"Let us not read the tea leaves," N. S. Khrushchev said, "but if
history were to confirm that the capitalist system really offers the
best opportunities of developing the productive forces of society and
of providing a better life for man and we don't believe that a kopek's
worth I would be the first to vote against communism. If I really
satisfied myself as to the superiority of capitalism over communism,"
N. S. Khrushchev said sarcastically, "then I would consider which
way to turn and whether I should join the Republicans or the Demo-
crats, though there is hardly any difference between them. It would
be a difficult choice to make." (Laughter.)

"I can tell you which party is better," Fulbright put in, amidst
general animation.

"Don't prompt me," N. S. Khrushchev continued. "I want to
make my own choice. (Laughter.) I know which party you represent,
but I'm not sure which of the two parties is better. I don't want to
interfere in your internal affairs." (Animation.)

Fulbright asked another question whether the Soviet Union
was prepared to agree to any of its allies choosing a two-party system.

"Questions like that are decided by the peoples themselves,"
N. S. Khrushchev replied.

The next to speak was Senator Hayden, a veteran of the U.S.
Senate and member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He

asked N. S. Khrushchev whether he favored the expansion of cultural
and scientific exchanges between the USSR and the USA.

"Yes," N. S. Khrushchev replied, "we advocate the broadest pos-
sible cultural and scientific exchange between our countries. But as
far as we know, it is not we who are holding things up. The counter-
proposal of the American side for an agreement on cultural relations
in 1960-1961, far from envisaging broader relations, is in fact aimed
at reducing them."

G. A. Zhukov, Chairman of the State Committee on Cultural
Relations, who was present, informed the audience that the U.S.
counter-proposal provided for only two major events in the sphere
of artistic exchange in 1960 and only one major event in 1961. None
of the 17 Soviet proposals for technical exchange were accepted by
the U.S. side. As regards the U.S. proposals for technical exchange,
the Soviet delegation has already agreed to a number of measures
with the proviso that the State Department, in turn, accept at least
some of the Soviet proposals.

Senator Lyndon Johnson, Democratic majority leader, asked
whether the Soviet Union would agree to cooperation between Soviet
and U.S. scientists in exploring outer space.

"By all means," N. S. Khrushchev replied

"Then why did you refuse to take part in the work of the UN
Outer Space Committee?" Johnson asked.

"You know why," N. S. Khrushchev replied "You wanted to
place us in the position of a poor relation on that committee, but we
will not have that. We offered you cooperation on a parity basis,
but you turned it down. Then we refused to participate in the work
of the UN Committee. You know perfectly well that at the moment
only you and we alone can engage, in practice, in the exploration of
outer space. Yet you wanted to push us out into the backyard on the
UN Committee. We will never consent to be put in so humiliating
a position. We refuse to be lectured in a committee in which you
have a majority. Do not injure our self-respect and we will not injure
yours. Then cooperation will be assured"

"I want to give the floor to a spokesman for the Congress
minority and an experienced polemicist, Senate Republican Leader
Dirksen," said Fulbright.

Everett M. Dirksen said he had two questions. First he asked
whether there was "any hope" of the Soviet Union's lifting control
over foreign correspondents' news dispatches.

"Every nation has its traditions," N. S. Khrushchev said, "and

every country has its Constitution. In your country the newspapers
see fit to print every possible slanderous fabrication and every pos-
sible comment, often provocative and nothing short of an outright
appeal to war. But in the Soviet Union, anyone who took it into his
head to write an article of that kind would be prosecuted, because
we have a law prohibiting war propaganda Your correspondents send
any information or article from the Soviet Union quite freely unless
it distorts the facts, unless it is grossly slanderous and insulting to
the Soviet people, and unless it incites to war.

"Many of your correspondents send fairly sensible articles and
our press even reprints some of them. But there are also correspond-
ents who abuse the freedom of the press."

"Your correspondents working in the U.S. are not controlled,"
Dirksen observed

N. S. Khrushchev replied that if any Soviet correspondent
working in the United States were to send a false report, he would
be instantly dismissed by his editorial office. Soviet journalists per-
form their mission honestly, while some of the Western correspond-
ents working in Moscow have no scruples about writing stuff that
if it were handed to the clerk in the telegraph office for transmission
she would be outraged and would refuse to send such rot abroad
We have no censorship. There is only control to prevent abuse of
the freedom of the press. We do not want to help foment hostility and
hatred between peoples by adopting an overconciliatory attitude.

We want international friendship and cooperation.

Zhukov offered to provide Senator Dirksen with factual data
on abuses of the freedom of the press by some foreign correspond-
ents working in Moscow. Dirksen made no reply.

Dirksen next asked whether foreigners would be allowed un-
restricted freedom of travel in the Soviet Union. He claimed that
Soviet people could travel in the USA without any restrictions.

"Let us agree," N. S. Khrushchev said, "that for every kilometer
which Soviet people travel on U.S. territory, we will let American
travelers do two kilometers in the Soviet Union."

A. I. Adzhubei, Deputy to the Supreme Soviet, said that on one
occasion he had even been refused permission to fly over the United
States, to say nothing of traveling across its territory, although he
had applied for a visa in person to Secretary of State Dulles. He
added that Soviet correspondents coming to New York to cover the
work of the UN General Assembly are allowed to use only specified
streets.

"I have been told," N. S. Khrushchev observed, 'that Soviet
diplomats cannot even travel from Washington to New York without
special permission. But I will not criticize your internal regulations.
I only wish to ask you what you want. You say that you want to
travel where you please. You want it for a very definite purpose.
Don't try to force anyone's bedroom door if it is locked That is
indecent What is this taste you have for peeping through keyholes?
You want us to lift travel restrictions in the Soviet Union, do you?
Then let us achieve agreement Let us abolish military bases on
foreign soil and withdraw troops from foreign territory to within
national boundaries. I assure you that you would then be allowed to
travel wherever you please. But you have surrounded us with mili-
tary bases and want to travel freely in our country and scout our
military bases. We call that military reconnaissance. That is why we
restrict certain areas of importance to our country's defense."

"Our guest would be a most formidable antagonist in any par-
liamentary forum anywhere in the world," said Senator Russell,
Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, amidst general
laughter.

"Not an antagonist, but a defender," N. S. E3irushchev remarked

"You have a good knowledge of many things in this country,"
Russell continued "But I am amazed to hear that you think we
want to interfere in your internal affairs. I have been on the Senate
Committee for 25 years but know nothing about appropriations for
subversive work in other countries. I am convinced that today the
people of the Soviet Union live better than ever before."

"Quite right," N. S. Khrushchev said

"And will live still better," Russell went on. "We don't intend
to interfere in your internal affairs, but I would like to ask this: You
support national self-determination; in light of this, are you prepared
to let the people of East Germany decide their destiny themselves
by a plebiscite?"

N. S. Khrushchev reminded the audience that it had been agreed'
at the beginning of the interview not to touch upon matters relating
to a third 1 country.

"I am a Russian," he said, "and represent the Soviet Union here.
You, however, are interested in German affairs. If you have any
questions on that score, send them to the Prime Minister- of the
German Democratic Republic and he will supply you with the in-
formation you want The address is well known -Grotewohl, Berlin.
They'll get there." (Animation.)

"You are bearing out what I said about your being a fine polem-
icist," Russell commented, with some embarrassment **I have one
more question. You gave a vivid account of the launching of the
Soviet moon rocket We have had setbacks in launching rockets.
What about you?"

"Why do you ask me?" N. S. Khrushchev said with a smile
"You had better ask Nixon he answered your question when he
said that the launching of our moon rocket had miscarried three
times. He knows better how things are with us. (Laughter.) Nixon
said, he was using information from a secret source, but of course he
didn't specify the source you cannot disclose a secret such as that,
because it is an invention.

"But if you like, I can answer that question, too. To be sure,
launching a rocket into space is no simple matter. It takes a great
deal of effort I will tell you a secret our scientists expected to
launch a moon rocket a week ago. The rocket was prepared and put
on the launching site, but when the equipment was being tested it
was found to be not working smoothly enough. Then, to be on the
safe side, our scientists replaced the rocket by another. It was that
second rocket which was launched. But the first rocket is intact, and
if you like, we can launch it too.

"That was how matters stood. I can swear on the Bible that this
is so. Let Nixon do likewise." ( General laughter, applause.)

Senator Russell thanked N. S. Khrushchev and said that the
Soviet moon shot was an outstanding achievement of Soviet science,
on which Americans sincerely congratulated Soviet scientists.

"Thank you," N. S. Khrushchev said. "We are satisfied with the
results of the work done by our scientists."

Senator Theodore F. Green, a Senate veteran and ex-Chairman
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, asked whether N. S.
Khrushchev considered "free elections" possible in West and East
Germany in the next six months.

N. S. Khrushchev reminded the audience that those taking part
in the interview had agreed not to touch upon the internal affairs of
a third country. Since, however, the German question comes within
the competence of the Great Powers that fought against Hitler Ger-
many, he said he was willing to comment on the matter.

"You are familiar with our attitude," N. S. Khrushchev said.
"We think it necessary to reckon with the fact that there now are
two sovereign states with different social systems on the former ter-
ritory of Germany. Let the Germans decide for themselves how they

should live in the future. It will be as they decide. I cannot answer
you on behalf of Comrade Grotewohl or Herr Adenauer. Let them
rather meet without an interpreter."

Senator Green then asked how elections were held in the Soviet
Union and whether it was true that in the USSR nominations were
made by only one party and votes could be cast only for one nominee

"Not exactly," N. S. Khrushchev replied. "About 40 per cent of
the deputies to the parliaments of the Soviet Union and Union
Republics, and to the regional and district Soviets of Working Peo-
ple's Deputies are not Party members. There is indeed only one
party in the Soviet Union. In the early period, when we still had
antagonistic classes, other parties as well were represented m our
parliament. But subsequently the structure of our society changed.
Today we have no antagonistic classes, the interests of all the working
people are represented by the Communist Party, the party of the
working people. During the election campaign nominations are made
as follows:

"Collectives of working people nominate various candidates, the
number of candidates being unlimited. Every collective campaigns
for its own nominee. Then representatives of the collectives of work-
ing people, elected by democratic procedure, get together and decide
by vote which nominee should be left on the ticket as the fittest
And it is for him that the electors vote.

"You have a different election system. That is a matter oi
tradition. Every nation establishes the kind of system it prefers/

Senator Wiley, ex-Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, asked the following question:

"On your way to this country, you doubtless set yourself s
definite goal What do you expect to accomplish by your U.S. trip?'

"I might address the same question to you, Senator," N. S,
Khrushchev replied. "So far as we are concerned, we are willing tc
take any steps to ensure peace, particularly in the matter of disarma-
ment But reaching agreement requires a mutual desire to achieve
useful results. Take the disarmament question. Are you prepared novi
to abolish military bases on foreign soil and withdraw your troop*
to within your national boundaries? We are!

"You claim that the socialist system in countries such as Polanc
and Hungary, where we have our troops for the time being, survives
solely thanks to their presence there.

"Very well, would you like to put yourself to a test? You wil
have the opportunity of seeing how the Poles manage their affairs

in the absence of foreign troops. You say that the Government of ti
German Democratic Republic is maintained only by our bayonet
Let us agree to withdraw your troops and ours to within the respe<
tive national boundaries and see what happens. Are you willing
(The Senator keeps silent for a long f time.) Let us sign an agreemer
to withdraw troops. Let the soldiers go home. How happy thei
mothers and their girls will be to embrace them! Are you willing
(The Senator says nothing.) There you are. You 'yourself are hes
tant to try it How can I say, then, what results my trip will yield
I don't know how far you are willing to go, but a great deal depend
on the U.S. Senate."

Fulbright, who was presiding, said that the Senators were happ
to have met N. S. Khrushchev and discussed with him a number c
questions of interest to them. He said he was not sure that anythin
had been solved by the meeting but thought there was now bette
mutual understanding, and that meant a lot

N. S. Khrushchev thanked the Senators and left the premises c
the Foreign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate.

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV

AT DINNER GIVEN FOR PRESIDENT DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER

N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of tfc
USSR, and Madame Khrushchova gave a dinner, on the evening c
September 16, for President Eisenhower and Mrs. Eisenhower in th
Soviet Embassy in Washington.

During the dinner N. S. Khrushchev and President Dwight I
Eisenhower exchanged speeches.

MR. PRESIDENT, MRS. EISENHOWER, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

This is the second day of our stay in the United States. I dori
know whether you are pleased with your guests, but the guests ar
very well pleased with their hosts. We like our stay in your countr]
but have no fear, I shall not ask for it to be prolonged (Animation.
My time is limited. I will fly to China literally the day after m;
return from the United States. There will be festivities there on th
occasion of the tenth anniversary of the People's Republic. It is nc
to make a secret deal that I will fly there, but to celebrate the bi
national holiday of People's China.

My friends and I have had a fine day today. You are re*
exploiters, I must say, and have made a good job of exploiting u
(Animation.) Mr. Lodge has been empowered to do so, and he hs

worn us out completely. (Laughter.) I don't know whether the ex-
ploiters are satisfied with us, but on this particular occasion the
exploited are satisfied with their exploiters. (Laughter.)

We had an interesting time at your agricultural research center.
You can be proud of it. We saw livestock and poultry there they
are excellent And I did not feel in the least that they had any objec-
tion to our representing a socialist country in a capitalist one. They
realized the necessity of coexistence. (Laughter.)

My next visit today was to the National Press Club. Journalists
are impetuous, quick-witted people. You and I, Mr. President, are
able to appreciate each other's plight when meeting journalists.
(Laughter.) In any case, I am hale and hearty, as you see, and I
think that speaks well for the meeting. As for what they will report,
we will know that tomorrow. It is something I cannot guess. There
were different people there, and they will probably report differently.
(Animation.)

Then we toured the city of Washington. I bear Mr. Lodge no
grudge on this point. We saw little because time was short But we
did see the best section of the city. It is a wonderful city. We saw
the Lincoln Memorial and paid homage to that great, most human
of humans in U.S. history, whose memory as a champion of freedom
will live through the ages.

Then there was the talk with the members of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee. I don't know whether the Senators were

Send-off at the railway station in Washington.

pleased with me. I cannot speak for them. But I am pleased, and
think that makes a half success. (Animation.) If the Senators are
also pleased with me, I would take that to be a complete success,
Jbut I don't know if they are.

I believe I speak for all my companions when I say that we are
very pleased with this evening and with your presence, Mr. President,
the presence of your wife and your colleagues, at so distinguished a
dinner. I feel sure perhaps because I want it very badly that our
coming at your invitation, Mr. President for we would not have
come to you otherwise and your forthcoming visit to our country
will help to thaw international relations; the ice of the cold war has
not only cracked but has indeed, begun to crumble.

I think that through joint effort we will reach the goal of actu-
ally melting the ice and establishing normal living conditions for
our peoples and good, friendly relations between our countries.

I raise this glass of champagne and invite all the guests to follow
suit I propose this toast to the President of the United States. I
don't know whether I have the right, whether I have your permission,
but we regard you as our good friend. You have shown how thor-
oughly scrupulous you are I don't quite know whether the term is
suitable to give an exact idea of how you performed your duty when
you were Allied Commander-in-Chief during the Second World War.
When you come to our country, you will feel the warmth which our
people will express. But I should like to ask you, when you feel that
warmth, not to draw a line between the people and the government
as some people try to do. That is a very bad line to draw, because in
our country the government expresses and does what the people
think and want

If the people express sympathy, it follows that the government
is of the same opinion. It would never even occur to me that there
is any need to test this unity. During your stay in the USSR you will
be able to satisfy yourself about the solid unity <of our people and
government. We need only wink to understand each other. Let those
who doubt come to us and see this unity for themselves.

I raise this glass of champagne and invite you to drink to the
health of the President; to your health, Mrs. Eisenhower; to yours,
dear guests, ladies and gentlemen; to all present here. Although this
wine is cold, may our relations grow warmer, may the atmosphere
mellow, so as to melt the ice of the cold war and create favorable
conditions for the peaceful coexistence of states, of our peoples.
Your health! ( Applause.)

IN NEW YORK September 17-19

N. S. Khrushchev and his party arrived in New York on September
17. Richard C. Patterson, representative of the municipal authority,
welcomed N. S. Khrushchev at the station.

Replying to his greetings, N. S. Khrushchev said:

MR. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MAYOR OF NEW YORK:

Allow me to thank you for your warm words on my own behalf
and on the behalf of my family, as well as those accompanying me.

I was very glad to receive the invitation to visit New York. I
express to you my gratitude for this invitation.

I would like to use this opportunity and convey wishes of best
success to the citizens of New York in their work, success in their
private lives and wish them happiness and well-being.

It is generally known that New York is a major industrial city,
a leading business center of the United States. In the past I myself
was a worker and am therefore especially glad to have the oppor-
tunity of greeting the working people who create material values for
society.

I am certain that the meetings and talks which I will have in
New York with representatives of various sections of the population
will facilitate a better understanding between our countries. This will
facilitate the adjustment of friendly relations between our states and
the strengthening of peace throughout the world.

I thank you for your attention.

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S SPEECH

AT THE LUNCHEON GIVEN BY ROBERT WAGNER,

MAYOR OF NEW YORK

Robert F. Wagner, Mayor of New York, gave a luncheon in honor
of N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers, on
September 17.

The Mayor made a speech of welcome. Henry Cabot Lodge, the
President's special representative, also made a speech.

N. S. Khrushchev delivered a speech as well.

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S SPEECH

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the honor you have shown me today.
I very nearly called you Robert Petrovich Wagner. In my youth

when I worked at a factory, our manager was an engineer by the
name of Robert Petrovich Wagner. (Animation, applause.) But, of
course, I am not confusing you with that other Wagner; you only
have the same names and surnames. (Laughter.)

I should like to thank you most sincerely for this wonderful
reception and, in particular, for the memorial medallion of your city
that you have presented to me, and for the message to the peoples
of the Soviet Union as a sign of respect and friendship between our
countries. (Applause.)

I should like to take this opportunity again to address words of
profound appreciation to the President of the United States, Dwight
Eisenhower. We made his acquaintance immediately after the war,
when he visited our Country. The military services rendered by Gen-
eral Eisenhower as Allied Commander-in-Chief in Western Europe
are valued highly in our country. We fought well together with you
against Nazi Germany. (Stormy applause.) It is only due to President
Eisenhower's invitation that I have the opportunity of being with
you today.

My respect for Mr. Eisenhower has grown still more since
this step. His decision to invite Khrushchev to America was not an
easy one. Few Americans would have dared to take such a step. To
do so one had to be a big man and, what is more, to understand big
politics. (Applause.) I am informed that some of the American political
leaders are opposed to this decision by the President The President's
wisdom lay precisely in .the fact that despite this, he went through
with what he had decided. It showed that he was more far-sighted
than those who, as we say in Russia, cannot see farther than their
own noses. (Laughter, applause.) A statesman must not only know
what is taking place today, but must show concern for the future and
work for its sake. (Applause.)

I would now like to thank you as well, Mr. Mayor of the City
of New York, because while President Eisenhower invited me to
America, you invited me to New York, because without your invi-
tation I could not have come to your great city. This invitation from
you might have come, of course, merely as a sign of courtesy to the
President. But evidently you also had a well-meaning interest in
seeing what sort of a person Khrushchev was. (Laughter, applause.)
To see what he was like. And so here I am before you and your
colleagues. (Stormy applause.)

Last but not least, I should like to thank Mr. Lodge, the Presi-
dent's special representative, who is performing a difficult function

and torturing me with a stiff program. (Laughter, applause.) But he
is also torturing himself. (Laughter, applause.) I am glad of that,
because it is easier to bear torture together. (Stormy applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, I have never gone in for diplomacy but
I have a good idea of diplomatic language in relations between
governments. If I tell you frankly what I think, let the diploma'd
diplomats not judge me too severely for possible deviations from
protocol. (. Animation, applause.)

You have probably noticed that I attentively followed Mr.
Lodge's and Mr. Wagner's speeches, and applauded both. That is why
I should like to make things clear. After all, some might think that
Khrushchev has been converted to your capitalist faith. (Laughter,
applause.) Lodge and Wagner defend the capitalist system, while
I applaud them. What am I? Among Communists I applaud Com-
munists, and among capitalists I applaud capitalists. It follows that
I applaud both to play up to them. (Animation, applause.)

Let us agree upon the following beforehand I do not think
there is any need for me to exert myself to try and make Commu-
nists out of you. That would be a waste of energy, and I need energy
for more important matters. (Applause.) But if anyone still nurses
the hope that I shall fcdopt the capitalist attitude, I want to tell you
straight from the shoulder that that is also a vain hope. (Stormy
applause.) Were I a supporter of capitalism, I would of course try to
come to your country, for after all the United States is the main
root of the world capitalist system. (Animation.) But I am convinced
that our system is much more solid and much better.

We Russians have a proverb which says that every snipe praises
its own bog. You extol the capitalist bog; as for us, I shall not,
naturally, say that socialism is a bog, but you can, of course, speak
of our system much as I speak of yours. But, as a matter of fact, the
proponents of capitalism are now beginning to be ashamed of prais-
ing it They are saying that it is no longer the capitalism that Marx
wrote about, but people's capitalism.

God knows, I seefno difference between the capitalism Marx
wrote about and the capitalism Lodge spoke of today. (Animation.)
I speak bluntly, so that you should know who you are dealing with.
Such clarity improves relations: We like socialism, while capitalism
does not suit us. If you like capitalism and I know that you like it
carry on, and God bless you! But remember that a new social
system, the socialist system, has come into being. It is already tread-

ing on your heels, and we are reckoning on overtaking and outdis-
tancing you.

1 Let' s better speak of what ought to unite us, rather than magnify
what might disunite us. (Stormy, prolonged applause.)

Let's compete peacefully and let the peoples judge which system
is better, which offers greater scope for the development of the pro-
ductive forces, which provides better for man's well-being. We must
respect the choice of the peoples. We must respect their eight to live
as they choose. We must base relations between governments on the
recognition that different social systems have an equal right to exist
We must ensure peaceful coexistence and thereby strengthen peace
throughout the world. (Applause.)

I say to you in all sincerity that we want to live with you in
friendship and peace. (Stormy, prolonged applause.) At one time
our people watched with admiration, and I would even say with envy,
how rapidly America developed after liberating herself from colonial
dependence. That was a revolutionary upsurge and an exploit Your
country swiftly built up its strength and outstripped all countries in
economic development You still have the highest standard of living.
You are still the richest country and the most powerful of the capi-
talist countries, of the capitalist countries I want to specify that
(Animation.) Just to be accurate, of course. (Applause.)

But by the time we also had a revolution you had evidently
forgotten the days of your own revolution and sent your troops to
Russia to help the Russian landlords and capitalists to suppress the
people. You may remember what came of it our people gave the
interventionists a kick in the pants. We kicked out your troops, and
the French, and the British, together with the White Guards. After
that you recognized us. True, you required sixteen years of delibera-
tion before doing it. But it was impossible not to recognize the new
that had come into being without so much as a by-your-leave and
had begun to live by its own will When you recognized us, we were,
of course, in a different position than today. But now there is all the
more reason for us to ensure peaceful coexistence.

Now, too, some of you may not like our system. But what can
you do? Try to use force to change the situation in our country?
You know yourselves what that would lead to!

But now that I have met you I can see that, like us, you too do
not want war. (Applause.) So let us come to terms on how we are to
secure eternal peace. (Stormy applause.) Let us broaden our con-
tacts. Let more delegations come to you from us and to us from you.

The only thing is that your State Department is said to be afraid of
this and wants to cut down on contacts rather than extend them. We
have sent them a few interesting proposals, but they are turning them
down. That is bad. Does that imply that you want to return to the
iron curtain? (Animation.)

We are for broad contacts, for the promotion of cultural and
scientific relations, for an exchange of scientific literature, for co-
operation with the United States and with all other countries regard-
less of their social system. (Applause.)

In your speeches you spoke of our joint struggle against Nazi
Germany. I set great store by the assistance you rendered us in that
struggle. Allow me, on behalf of the Soviet Government and people,
to convey our gratitude to the American people for that cooperation
in the fight against the common enemy. The assistance you rendered
us under lend-lease played its role. (Applause.)

You are informed, of course, of the contribution of the Soviet
people to victory over the common enemy. That contribution was the
very largest It played a decisive role in defeating the German invad-
ers. In the last war the Soviet people suffered the heaviest losses for
the sake of victory over fascism.

I had the pleasure today to shake hands with Admiral Kirk and
Mr. Harriman, who had been ambassadors of the United States in
Moscow during the war years, and also with the present U.S. Ambas-
sador in Moscow, Thompson, who worked at that time in the Amer-
ican Embassy in Moscow, making every effort to ensure victory over
the common enemy. (Applause.)

Mf. Harriman visited us in the Soviet Union some time ago
and we had a pleasant friendly talk. We conversed with him in a
friendly way. Some may ask how that could be, Harriman being a
big capitalist, and I not the hindmost of Communists. Yet there we
were, having a friendly talk. (Animation.) But that only confirms
that there is a question that can bring everybody together workers,
and peasants, and merchants, and capitalists. It concerns all people
living on earth. It is the question of ensuring peace. For the sake
of resolving this question we are in duty bound to seek and find a
common language (Applause.)

In conclusion, I should like to thank the Mayor of New York
City for inviting us to take part in the exhibition that you are plan-
ning to hold in 1964. For the moment I can only give you my per-
sonal opinion (you have a poor idea of our democratic system, the
Chairman of the Council of Ministers cannot in our country take

such a decision before the government examines the question), but I
think your invitation will be favorably received When you send us
this proposal officially, we shall discuss it, and I expect that we shall
consider it an honor to participate in the exhibition you are planning
for 1964. (Applause.)

I have come to the end of my speech. I thank you for your
attention and for your patience. After all, I spoke extemporaneously,
and being speakers yourselves you well know that when you speak
without notes your speech turns out longer than you wanted. I have
therefore wearied you somewhat Thank you again for your attention.
Good-bye, ladies and gentlemen. (Stormy applause.)

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S SPEECH

AT THE DINNER GIVEN IN THE ECONOMIC CLUB OF NEW YORK

Members of the Economic Club of New York gave a dinner in
honor of N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the
USSR, on the evening of September 17.

In his introductory speech Herbert Woodman, President of the Club
and President of the large Interchemical Corporation, pointed out that
today everybody recognizes the historic significance of the exchange of
visits between Khrushchev and Eisenhower. The Soviet people, the Club
President declared, may be justly proud of their economic achievements.
At the same time, Woodman praised the capitalist system in every way
possible, claiming, for example, that the struggle against monopolies
was, allegedly, under way in the USA. Henry Cabot Lodge, the Presi-
dent's special representative, spoke in the same vein.

After that the floor was given to N. S. Khrushchev.

MR, CHAIRMAN, GENTLEMEN:

Before proceeding with the address which I prepared prior to
coming to your club, I should like to say a few words on some of the
points brought up here by the Chairman, Mr. Woodman, and by Mr.
Lodge.

Mr. Woodman said that never in the history of your club has
there been such a large number of people as today, wishing to attend
a meeting with a guest Before our meeting began I jokingly told Mr.
Woodman that in some parts of my country, where the people have
never seen, say, a camel, large crowds assemble when a camel ap-
pears. Everybody wants to take a look at it, and some even wish to
pull its tail. (Laughter, applause.)

Forgive me my joke, but I should like to draw something of a
parallel. The flower of the capitalist world of New York, and not

only of New York, is gathered here. And suddenly a Communist
appears in such select company, a company to which you are accus-
tomed. Understandably, the wish arises to take a look at him, and
to pull him by the tail if he proves to have one. ( General hilarity,
burst of applause.)

I don't know if Mr. Marshall MacDuffie is present here. I saw
him today at the luncheon given by the Mayor of New York. During
the first years after the war, when I was Chairman of the Council
of Ministers in the Ukraine, Mr. MacDuffie came to the Soviet Union
as representative of UNRRA, the American war relief organization.
I was on very good terms with him and with the late La Guardia,
the former Mayor of New York and head of UNRRA. Marshall
MacDuffie came to us again when I was already working in Moscow.
In one of our conversations he told me then that it would be very
useful if I were to visit America. I asked him why. MacDuffie replied
that some Americans thought I had horns. If they were to see I had
no horns, that would be a great achievement (Laughter, applause.)

I did not make that up. Ask MacDuffie, he will confirm our
conversation. I think that now all of you here can see for yourselves
that I really have no horns. (Laughter, applause.) Having convinced,
yourselves of this, the victory will be half won if you convince others.
People will realize that Communists are human beings like everybody
else. The only difference between us is the difference in our views
on the political structure and social system of states. And we must
achieve agreement on the point that each people must choose for
itself what system to maintain.

As far as I know, you do not let your competitors look into
your account books. Don't look into our accounts, then, for we have
our own communist system of bookkeeping. (Animation.) Let's better
live in peace. There are cases with you too, aren't there though they
may be rare when competing corporations come to an agreement
not to attack each other. Why then, to use your language, should not
we, representatives of the communist corporation, and you, repre-
sentatives of the capitalist corporation, agree on peaceful coexistence?
Let each abide by his own views. (Prolonged applause.)

I know that you like capitalism, and I don't want to dissuade
you. I would simply do no more than humiliate myself if I were to
take advantage of the hospitality of the biggest capitalists and begin
moralizing to you about the superiority of communism. That would
be a senseless thing to do before this audience. Let history be the
judge! (Prolonged applause.)

Leaving the session hall of the United Nations General Assembly
after delivering the speech on general and complete disarmament.

Why then did Mr. Lodge so zealously defend capitalism here?
He did it so zealously, and that is only natural. If he did not defend
capitalism so fervently, he would not hold such an important post
in your country. (Laughter, applause.) The only question I have is
what made Mr. Lodge plead the benefits of capitalism with such
ardor today? Is it possible that he wished to talk me into adopting
the capitalist faith? (Laughter.) Or perhaps, Mr. Lodge is afraid
that if a Bolshevik addresses capitalists he will convert them and
they will espouse the communist faith? I want to reassure you:
I have no such intentions I know with whom I am dealing. (Laugh-
ter, prolonged applause.)

If Mr. Harriman will allow me, I shall tell you about our ex-
change of jokes in a conversation we had in Moscow. I said in jest
that Mr. Harriman was "jobless" after having been ousted by Rocke-
feller from the post of governor of your state (animation), and that
now he was at loose ends. Whereupon Comrade Mikoyan observed

that a job for him could be found in the Soviet Union (laughter,
applause), and I said: "If you like, I offer you the position of eco-
nomic adviser to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the
USSR, with a good salary and a good country house." (Laughter,
applause.) You, of course, realize that this was said in jest

That is my reply to Mr, Lodge.

I cannot grasp why he tried to convince me that you are busi-
nessmen. I know it myself. If you were not managing important
affairs you would not be occupying such high positions and would
not be here today.

I am accompanied by Comrade Yelyutin, the Minister of Special
Secondary and Higher Education. He will confirm that we are train-
ing many specialists. But if any of you wanted to share in building
communism in our country, we would take his measure and find him
a suitable job; the greater the benefit his work would bring, the more
he would be paid for it (Laughter, applause.) We know how to value
people, and the greater the benefit their work yields, the higher the
pay for their labor. Such is the principle of socialism.

You will excuse me for this digression. I only wanted to explain
to Mr. Lodge that there was no cause for him to worry about his
capitalists. So far as I can see, none of them will become Communists.
And do not worry about me, either. I shall remain a Communist and
shall not join any of your corporations. (Laughter, applause.) As
people say, we shall come out even. (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, it gives me great pleasure to meet busi-
nessmen in the Economic Club of New York. My visit to the United
States gives me the opportunity of getting a better knowledge of the
life of your great country and of establishing personal contacts with
your people, with all sections of it, including you gentlemen of the
business world.

I think that you too would find it interesting to make a closer
acquaintance with us Soviet people representing the socialist system,
and, so to say, to get first-hand information on how we live, how we
run our household and how we build our economy.

I know that businessmen are wont to talk without diplomatic
niceties, with utter frankness. That is why I take the liberty of telling
you in all frankness what may not perhaps be to the liking of some
of you, but would yet be good for you.

Some people blinded, to put it mildly, by their dislike of
socialism and communism dream in their sleep, as the saying goes,
of the ruin of the countries that have taken that path of development.

i his dreams a person usually sees his cherished desires, and all too
[ten the awakening brings him disappointment: He opens his eyes
ad finds the same faces and the same environment that surrounded
im when he plunged into his vain dream.

Some people frequently dream that socialist Russia is the same
s it was before the Revolution. But let's compare the rates at which
le Soviet Union has been developing since we overthrew the old,
jtten system, and the rates of development in the United States
uring the same period. Compared with the 1913 level, output in the
oviet Union has increased 36-fold, and only fourfold in your country.
Thy does pur economy and culture develop more rapidly than
ours? I am not imposing my ideology upon you, though I do not
onceal my allegiance to the Communist Party and my political
lews they are known to you. But the figures show convincingly
bat the source of our rapidly growing strength is the socialist revo-
ation, which enabled our country to take a road of development
long which the locomotive of Soviet economy is racing at an ever
cicreasing speed. Old Russia could never have even dreamed of such
L pace.

Possibly you disagree with me. But can you explain, then, what
niracles brought those results about? What miracles, I ask you?

In old Russia 76 of every 100 people over nine years of age
vere illiterate. Nearly 80 per cent of the children and teenagers had
10 opportunity of going to school, whereas today all our children go
o school and there are practically no illiterate people in the country.
We now have 40 times more specialists with a special secondary or
ugher education than in pre-Revolutionary Russia, and our higher
schools train almost three times as many engineers as American
iniversities and colleges. Last year, for example, we trained 94,000
engineers, while you trained 35,000.

We have now worked out and begun a titanic seven-year plan
>f economic development. I shall name just one figure to give you
m idea of its scale: Our capital investments alone will amount to
approximately 750 billion dollars in these seven years. Fulfillment
Df this plan will bring us close to the level of economic development
in the United States.

Where do we get the funds for all this? Where do we get the
accumulations? All this can only be explained by the advantages
of the socialist system, for, as we know, miracles don't happen.

Some people may, as before, doubt the feasibility of our plans.
But that is ostrich policy; when an ostrich sees that its rival is over-

taking it, it is said to hide its head in the sand Our development will
not cease if you close your eyes to reality.

Already I can disappoint the people who are playing ostrich.
Do you happen to know how we are fulfilling the first year of the
seven-year plan?

Our plan for 1959 envisaged a 7.7 per-cent rise in industrial
output Actually, we have increased output by 12 per cent in the
first eight months of this year. There is reason to believe that we will
produce more than 10 billion dollars worth over and above this year's
plan. This means that, far from planning any impossible rates of
economic development, we have, on the contrary, provided favorable
conditions for industry, so as not to overtax the economy, and to
receive additional accumulations through overfulfillment of the plan
and to make the work of our enterprises more rhythmical. Conse-
quently, we shall be able to overtake the USA in economic devel-
opment, first in volume and then per head of population, more
rapidly than projected in our plans.

Before my departure, Comrade Kosygin, Chairman of the State
Planning Committee, reported to me on the plan prepared by the
committee for 1960, which has, in the main, been worked out in
detail. True, it is still a tentative plan, but it has already been
coordinated with all the Union Republics, and is therefore close to
the form in which it will be approved. It will probably be approved
soon after my return from America, at the close of October or early
in November. The figures of this plan are not without interest For
example, in 1960 we shall be able to produce two million more
metric tons rolled stock than initially projected for the second year
of the seven-year plaa With regard to oil, we are planning to increase
output by more than 14 million metric tons in 1960 alone. This, too,
is not bad for our economy.

Excellent prospects are opening up for our gas industry. For the
time being, America ranks first in the world for output and known
reserves of gas, but in recent years we have been making increasing
use of natural gas. Our geologists have discovered such huge gas
deposits as will suffice for decades to come. This enables us to expand
the extraction and consumption of gas still more and to surpass you
in this respect as well

These, gentlemen, are only a few words about our potentials.
We have everything we need Our people are solidly behind their
government, full of enthusiasm. They strive to do their duty to the

best of their ability and thereby strengthen their socialist system still
more.

Possibly some people thought I would come to the United States
to solicit for the development of Soviet-American trade, without
which, it is alleged, the seven-year plan cannot be fulfilled. I want
to say in all frankness that I have not come here to beg. We have
always, ever since the inception of the Soviet state, urged the devel-
opment of international trade. And we are by no means raising this
question today because lack of such trade will prejudice the fulfill-
ment of the seven-year plan. Whoever thinks so is making a big
mistake.

We attach considerable importance to the development of inter-
national trade, acting upon the same rule as many people in your
country, too, if we are to believe the motto reproduced on a postage
stamp recently issued in the United States: "World peace through
world trade."

We agree with this approach. True, when I said approximately
something of the kind some time ago, indicating that trade is impor-
tant as a means of relaxing international tension, I was criticized by
some people in America. Your newspapers wrote at that time that
Khrushchev spoke of trade only because for him trade is no more
than politics. But if we are really to speak about who has turned
trade into a political weapon, it is an American institution you all
know that invented a special list of embargoes, which you, business-
men, are compelled to observe when trading with the Soviet Union.
Let's not argue, however. History will establish who associated trade
with politics, and in what way.

I want to emphasize that the Soviet Government has always
advocated, and continues to advocate, equitable, mutually beneficial
international trade without any discrimination whatsoeverthe trade
spoken of by Benjamin Franklin, whose words "Commerce among
nations should be fair and equitable" are engraved above the front
entrance of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

The establishment of all sorts of embargo lists in trade is some-
thing we oppose and shall always oppose as unreasonable practice.
If you do not wish to trade in so-called strategic, or any other goods,
you don't have to. That is your affair. But do not introduce discrim-
ination against any country or group of countries. This practice
disrupts normal international trade and leads to political complica-
tions. Indeed, history tells us that governments resort to such restric-
tions only when they contemplate a military campaign against the

country subjected to discrimination. Let us then clear the path to
normal trade relations between all countries, irrespective of their
social systems.

We are trading on a basis of equality with many countries.
Suffice it to say that last year the volume of Soviet foreign trade
exceeded the 1938 level sevenfold and amounted to 34,589 billion
rubles.

Our trade relations with Britain are shaping up quite well
Trade is expanding with businessmen in West Germany. It should
be noted that the Government of West Germany also has a correct
understanding of the interests of its country in this matter and
cooperates in the development of trade contacts rather than obstructs
them. We welcome this. Good economic relations are shaping up
between us and Italy. Relations with France are not bad. Why then
must America stand apart? However, that is up to you. The question
of trade is a question of profit If you find it unprofitable to buy from
us, or to sell us some goods, do as you think best

But bear one thing in mind. It sometimes happens that too
choosy a girl lets time slip, stays a spinster too long, and is left
empty-handed. (Laughter.) Such maidenly indecision is doubly out
of place in business, where the rule "First come, first served" per-
petuated in an English proverb, operates more than anywhere else.
We too have a rather good saying to that effect: "He who comes late
gets a picked bone." (Animation.)

In justifying the stagnation that has persisted in Soviet-American
economic relations for almost 10 years, some public leaders poli-
ticians rather than businessmen allege that this situation is normal
and even of advantage to the Western world. They seriously maintain
that by refusing to trade with us the United States retards the eco-
nomic development of the Soviet Union and weakens its defensive
might

However, I think there are few people in this hall who believe
this. You all know through the press about the Soviet sputniks and
rockets, about the growth of our economy, which has never been so
rapid as in the past ten years. If any of you still have even the
slightest doubts on that score, you are welcome to come to the Soviet
Union and see for yourselves, as your colleague, Mr. Harriman, has
done recently.

By the way, we spoke with Mr. Harriman on a number of
questions, including the question of trade. I told him, and I can now
repeat it, that the law banning trade with the USSR, which was

passed in the United States as a repressive measure against the Soviet
Union, has led to results directly opposite to what its authors
anticipated.

We have even derived a certain benefit from the trade policy*
which the United States pursued with regard to the Soviet Union.
We have had to develop production of machines that we did not
have before and intended to buy from you, and now are not depend-
ent on anyone in this respect Thus, the artificial dwarfing of trade
with the Soviet Union has strengthened rather than weakened us,

Look at the tremendous successes achieved in our economy in
those ten years, look how our technology and science have developed!
We discovered the secret of using the energy of hydrogen before you
did. We were ahead of you in developing the intercontinental ballistic
rocket, which, in fact, you do not have to this day. Yet, when you
come to think of it, the intercontinental ballistic rocket is truly a
condensation of creative human thinking.

So, what sense is there in your restrictions? Continuation by
the United States of the policy of trade discrimination against the
Soviet Union is simply a piece of senseless obstinacy. (Animation.)
From time immemorial lively trade has been considered a good
omen in relations between countries. In the situation obtaining today
international trade acquires still greater importance as a kind of
barometer of the relations between countries. Then may the pointer
of this barometer move at least towards "Variable," and once it
passes that line we are sure that given the effort of both sides it
will soon point to "Fair weather."

You are all well informed of the fact that we are offering you
economic competition. Some describe this as our challenge to the
United States. But speaking of challenges, one might say perhaps
and it would even be more precise that it was the United States
that first challenged the whole world. The USA developed its econ-
omy to a higher level than in any other country. For a long time
nobody ventured to dispute your supremacy. But the time has now
come when a country has appeared which accepts your challenge,
which takes into account the level of development in the United
States, and in turn challenges you. You may rest assured that the
Soviet Union will hold its own in this economic competition: It will
overtake you and leave you behind.

But what harm is there in that? No matter who wins in this
competition you or we both the Soviet Union and the United

States will gain by it, because our peoples will have peace and live
still better than today. ^

Incidentally, competition as we Soviet people understand and
practice it by no means excludes cooperation and mutual assistance,
and we are ready to extend this rule to the United States, if you will
agree to it After all, haven't we cooperated with you in the past?
Some thirty years ago, when our country started building a large-
scale industry, good economic contacts were established with leading
U.S. firms. Ford helped us build the motor works in Gorky. Cooper,
a prominent American specialist, acted as consultant during the
building of the hydropower station on the Dnieper, which in those
days was the biggest in the world. Your engineers helped us build
the tractor works in Stalingrad and Kharkov. Americans, along with
the British, were consultants during the construction of the Moscow
subway. We were grateful to your specialists for their cooperation,
and many of them returned home with Soviet decorations and letters
of thanks, to say nothing of material remuneration. (Animation.)

What is there to prevent us from renewing and developing
economic cooperation at. the present, qualitatively new stage, when
it is not only we who could learn from you, but you, too, who could
learn a lot from our engineers, designers and scientists? Such coop-
eration would most certainly be of mutual benefit.

Your and our economic successes will be hailed by the whole
world, which expects our two Great Powers to help the peoples who
are centuries behind in their economic development to get on their
feet more quickly, I shall say nothing now about whose fault that is
you know it perfectly well. Let us better decide on a just and
humane way of helping these countries out of the plight in which
they find themselves.

The position of the Soviet Union in this matter is clear. Although
our country has not made a single ruble through the exploitation of
the natural resources and labor of other countries, we are ready to
continue assisting the countries of Asia and Africa that have won
their independence. Yet it would be only fair if the countries that
utilize the natural resources and the labor of other countries loosened
their purse-strings more.

Gentlemen, I read the allegation in your newspapers that the
policy of peaceful coexistence which we are offering to you actually
means the establishment .of a "divided world." Nothing could be
farther from a correct understanding of the ideas of peaceful co-
existence than such an interpretatioa In reality, we want to secure

exactly the opposite: Peaceful coexistence and competition imply
increasing economic and cultural intercourse between nations. And,
conversely, rejection of peaceful coexistence and competition signifies
the disruption of all intercourse between countries and the further
fanning of the cold war.

Every person who does not want deliberately to shut his eyes
to hard facts will recognize that the only sensible way for inter-
national relations to develop in our time is that of settling outstanding
international issues by negotiation. Our visit to the United States
and President Eisenhower's coming visit to the Soviet Union will,
we hope, allow us to hold a frank exchange of views on existing
controversial issues and facilitate agreement between us. (Applause.)
To live in peace as good neighbors or to drift to another war
such is the choice that now confronts the Soviet Union, the United
States of America and the whole world. There is no third choice if,
of course, we discount the fantastic possibility of either one of us
wanting to move from the earth to another planet I do not believe
in the latter possibility: The Soviet people are doing quite well on
earth, and. you, too, I should imagine, do not intend to book passage
for the moon. My information is that it is not very cosy there at the
moment.

Big possibilities are concentrated in your hands, gentlemen. You
are influential people. That is why, in addressing you today, I should
like to voice the hope that U.S. businessmen will use their influence
in the right direction and support peaceful coexistence and compe-
tition between us, just as some prominent representatives of your
economy are already doing. I have respect for Mr. Cyrus Eaton, for
example, who is showing courage and foresight

True, they say that there are people who do not like the fact
that certain American businessmen are supporting the idea of peace-
ful coexistence. These businessmen are even criticized for it in the
press. But, as the saying goes, "He who wants to have eggs must put
up with the cackle of hens." (Laughter.)

Naturally, gentlemen of the business world, I am not urging
you to adopt our world outlook I think that you, too, do not expect
to win me over to the capitalist faith we are obviously past that
age. You evidently believe in the victory of your system, and I am
confident in the victory of socialism.

I can see some of you smiling a person who is convinced that
his own views are right is usually ironical in his attitude to the other
party, who is just as firm in his views. But although I lay no claim

to being a prophet, I can say that some people will apparently have
to swallow a bitter pill when they realize that they have incorrectly
evaluated the situation and erred in their calculations. If -they are
men of action and intelligence, then judging by the experience of
the socialist countries, they will be given the opportunity of applying
their knowledge, their energy and their abilities when the American
people go over to a new social system.

You will forgive me this joke; I had no intention of offending
and, still less, of insulting anybody. I just wanted to express my
thoughts about the future as I see it

In conclusion, allow me to wish that each of you make his
contribution to improving the relations between our countries and
bettering the international situation. Thank you. (Prolonged
applause.)

After N. S. Khrushchev finished his speech, he answered a number of
questions.

QUESTION PERIOD

The first to take the floor was the Editor of the American maga-
zine Look. His question was considered by the speaker to be of an
obviously provocative nature and meant to divert the attention of
the gathering from the basic points put forward by the head of the
Soviet Government in his speech, which was received with great

Delegates to the United Nations General Assembly greeting Khrushchev.

interest by the numerous guests assembled in the largest room of the
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel The questioner did not seem to understand
how the thesis of peaceful coexistence of capitalist and socialist
countries could be reconciled with the propositions of scientific com-
munism about the inevitable triumph of communist ideas throughout
the world.

KHRUSHCHEV: The fact that you ask such questions and the
fact that some gentlemen are laughing before hearing my reply show
how little they know of the substance of the matter. People who are
well-grounded in history know that when human society was com-
pleting the transition from feudalism to capitalism there also was
a struggle between the old and the new. Like other nations, the
American people also fought for a transition to the more perfect
social form of that day. You fought against slavery and feudalism,
you fought for progress, against the old system which impeded the
development of the productive forces, and in the end you were
victorious. But at the time the American people established a repub-
lic, czarist Russia was still a semi-feudal country where serfdom
prevailed. Your economy progressed rapidly, while the economy of
czarist Russia lagged considerably behind the American economy in
its development. And that was only natural, because the social sys-
tem which triumphed in your country was more progressive than the
system that preceded it. Nevertheless, republican America coexisted
peacefully with monarchist Russia. They did not wage war against
each other.

Why is it, then, that at this time, when mankind has come to a
new stage of development, you refuse to accept the idea of the peace-
ful coexistence of v capitalist and socialist countries? This, of course,
does not alter the substance of the matter.

REMARK FROM THE BALCONY: That does not answer the
question!

KHRUSHCHEV: You may not like the substance of the matter,
but such is the history of human development I might only add what
folk say in such cases: If a girl who has had a baby still wants to
be regarded as a girl, and even goes to court to be recognized as
such, this does not alter the case. Even if the court were to grant her
that recognition, she would never again be a girl all the sama
(General laughter, applause.)

I am told that you are the editor of a magazine. That is evi-
dently so. What do you want? Do you want me to give you a guar-
antee that the American people will live eternally in the conditions

of a capitalist society? Do "you want a prescription for preserving
capitalism from extinction? I am no doctor and cannot offer prescrip-
tions of that kind. The question of what system you will have in your
country depends neither on me, nor on you. It depends on the Amer-
ican workers, on the American people. They will decide what system
to choose. Do not, therefore, expect to get any sedatives, Mr. Editor,
I cannot give them to you. No one can halt the inexorable march of
history! I just want to emphasize that we are for noninterference in
the internal affairs of other countries. Hence, the situation in your
country is your own responsibility! (Prolonged applause.)

M. KELLY (researcher and consultant in industrial management):
I am interested in the Soviet Government's attitude toward cultural
and scientific exchange between the United States of America and
the Soviet Union. Could you say something about that?

KHRUSHCHEV: I can tell you that I have discussed the question
yesterday with the Senators on the Foreign Relations Committee.
The Soviet Union is persistently advocating broader cultural and
scientific exchange with all countries, including, of course, the United
States of America. I told the Senators that we were surprised the
State Department was not meeting us halfway and was contemplat-
ing to curtail somewhat the exchange in all fields the exchange of
cultural, scientific, student and other delegations. So you will have
to take this question to the State Department and ask them why
they have adopted the line of curtailing, rather than extending, our
cultural relations. (Animation f applause.)

HERBERT WOODMAN: Thank you, Mr. Khrushchev, for your
reply. The State Department is represented here, and we hope to
hear something from them on the question. (Animation^ applause.)

KELLY: Allow me to ask one more question. Does the Soviet
Union intend to extend publication of data on scientific research done
by Soviet scientists? Lately we have had frequent contact with Soviet
scientists and admire their achievements. Is there any intention of
publishing more of their papers? It would promote international
cooperation among scientists.

KHRUSHCHEV: I like this question you can feel a practical
approach in it. Just what papers do you mean? It is hard for me to
reply, because you have put the question in general form. In the
Soviet Union we strive to publish all works of great scientific value,
with the exception of classified matter related to defense. Other
countries, including the United States, do the same thing. We are

well aware that a country which makes a secret of all scientific re-
search thereby retards the development of its own science. We have
no wish to harm ourselves. Our socialist society is free of competition
and we do not have to fear that the publication of information by
one research institute will cause damage to another, as is often the
case in relations between capitalist firms carrying on research. That
is our advantage over the capitalist system.

KELLY: You are right, my question was too general Allow me,
therefore, to ask you to speed up as much as possible the publication
of information about research done by Soviet scientists under the
International Geophysical Year.

KHRUSHCHEV: Thank you for specifying. When I return home
I shall look into the matter and try to speed up the publication of
the materials you speak of. I can see no secrets in the matter.
(Stormy applause.)

WOODMAN: Why don't our broadcasts to the Soviet Union reach
the listener? (The representative of the tobacco firm went on to urge
that all sorts of publications from capitalist countries be distributed
in the Soviet Union and that reception of broadcasts from the Voice
of America and similar radio stations be organized on as wide a scale
as possible in the Soviet Union.)

KHRUSHCHEV: Gentlemen, please understand me correctly. I
have come here at the invitation of the President In our very first
talks with Mr. Eisenhower we decided not to touch upon questions
related to the internal competence of our two countries.

(Cries of an obviously provocative nature are again heard from
the balcony. But some people below as well join the voices from
the balcony.)

KHRUSHCHEV: Gentlemen, since you have invited me, I would
ask you to hear me out attentively. If you do not want to, I can
stop talking. I did not come to the USA to beg. I represent the great
Soviet state, a great people who have made the Great October
Revolution. And no sallies, gentlemen, can drown out what has been
achieved and done by our great people, and what it is planning to
do. (Noise in the hall, rebuking the authors of the remarks and cries.)
I will reply to all your questions if you stop trying to shout me down.

The question of how and what our people should hear is the
affair of our people, the affair of the Soviet people. These questions
are decided, and will always be decided, by the Soviet people them-
selves and their government, without foreign interference.

You are displeased that the Soviet people refuse to listen to
the anti-Soviet broadcasts of the Voice of America, but you yourselves
"jam" some good American voices. We Soviet people, and many
other people as well, like the wonderful voice of America, for exam-
ple, with which Paul Robeson sings. Yet you must know, of course,
that for many years your government did not let him go to countries
that invited him to sing. Why did you jam that voice? Paul Robeson
has a splendid voice and we like to listen to him. But we have no
desire to listen to the false voice with which you want to talk to us.
It would be different if your voice were friendly, wholesome. We will
not jam such a voice. We are ready to listen to it. (Cries of approval.)

WOODMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman of the Council of Minis-
ters of the USSR, for your speech, for patiently listening to all our
questions in spite of being very tired,- and for answering them so
comprehensively. Tell us, if we show that it will be better in our
country than in yours, will you go on fighting capitalism just the
same? I should like to assure you that the members of our Economic
Club are willing to compete with the Soviet people in peaceful
pursuits.

(Amid cries of approval from the entire audience, Nikita
Sergeyevich Khrushchev shakes hands warmly with Mr. Woodman.
Then he returns to the rostrum.)

KHRUSHCHEV: Gentlemen, everybody will be winners in the
peaceful competition that we are offering you. If the cause, the
system which you represent, gives people more blessings and creates
better living conditions for them, if it gives more scope to the produc-
tive forces of society than socialism, I shall come to you and ask you
for a job. (General laughter, applause.) But at the moment, gentle-
men, do not offer me "causes," because the cause I serve, the great
cause of communism, is the best and the noblest cause of all! Why
then should I change it for something else! (Animation.) To speak
seriously, I have come to your country to establish friendship with
the American people. The Soviet people want this friendship, they
desire greater cooperation with the American people. They want a
strengthening of peace throughout the world.

Thank you. (Prolonged applause.)

N. S. Khrushchev's speech and his replies to questions were received by
those present with great attention and on numerous occasions were interrupted
by applause. They made a great impression on the representatives of American
business circles.

On September 18, Mr. Herbert Woodman addressed the following letter to
N. S. Khrushchev:

Dear Chairman Khrushchev:

While you are still in New York, I want to express to you the
great appreciation of the Economic Club of New York for your
address at the meeting last night It was an epoch-making event in
the history of the club. I also want to express my great personal
pleasure in having had the opportunity to meet and talk with you.

I sincerely hope that there was no real misunderstanding as a
result of the apparent discourtesy on the part of a few members of
the audience during the question period In so large a group it seems
almost inevitable that there will be a few people who are forgetful
of their manners. I feel sure you realized how very few they were.
The membership of the club and the vast preponderance of guests
were greatly interested in what. you had to say and were genuinely
appreciative of your willingness to answer questions after such an
extremely long and strenuous day.

This morning I have received many comments about the meet-
ing. They have, without exception, been to the effect that it was an
extremely interesting and rewarding experience. Once again, I thank
you both personally and on behalf of all who were present

Sincerely,
HERBERT WOODMAN

Dear Mr. Woodman:

I thank you heartily for your letter in which you speak so
highly of my speech in the Economic Club of New York.

Like you, I am well aware that the individuals who tried to
cast a shadow on our meeting with their unfriendly cries do not
represent the opinion of either the businessmen who gathered at the
Economic Club or the American people, and for that reason failed
to receive any support at such a distinguished and responsible meet-
ing. Just like you, I pay no attention whatsoever to them.

We have had a good businesslike meeting and in many respects
it has helped to improve mutual understanding and strengthen
friendly relations between the United States of America and the

Soviet Union.

With sincere respect,
N. KHRUSHCHEV

September 19, 1959

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV

AT THE SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY

N. S. Khrushchev addressed the session of the UN General Assem-
bly on September 18. Below we publish the full text of the Declaration
of the Soviet Government he submitted to the General Assembly of the
United Nations.

MR PRESIDENT, ESTEEMED DELEGATES:

My visit to the United States at the invitation of the President,
Mr. Dwight Eisenhower, has coincided with the beginning of the
session of the United Nations General Assembly. Permit me, first of
all, to express my sincere thanks to the Assembly delegates and to
the Secretary General for this opportunity to speak from the lofty
tribune of the United Nations. I appreciate this honor all the more
since the Soviet Union is today submitting to the General Assembly
highly important proposals on the most burning issue disturbing the
peoples the disarmament problem.

History knows no other international organization in which the
peoples reposed such hopes as in the United Nations. Born in the
grim days when the rumble of the last battles of the Second World
War had not yet died away and when the ruins of devastated towns
and villages were still smoking, the United Nations, expressing the
thoughts and aspirations of millions upon millions of tormented
people, proclaimed its main purpose to be that of delivering suc-
ceeding generations from the scourge of war. Today the United
Nations embraces more than eighty states. Its ranks have been
joined by many of the states which, in the past war, were in the
camp hostile to those who had laid the foundations of this organ-
ization.

More than fourteen years have elapsed since this international
forum was created. Yet the purpose for which the organization was
founded still has not been achieved. The peoples still live in constant
anxiety about peace, about their future. And how can they not feel
this anxiety when, now in one part of the world, now in another,
military conflicts flare up and human blood is shed? The clouds of
a new war danger, at times thickening into storm clouds, loom over
a world which has not yet forgotten the horrors of the Second World
War.

The tension in international relations cannot continue forever:
Either it will reach a point where there can be only one outcome
war or, by their joint efforts, the states will succeed in ending this
tension in time. The peoples expect the United Nations to redouble

N. S. Khrushchev speaking at the 14th session of the UN General Assembly on Septem

its efforts toward creating an atmosphere of trust and mutual under-
standing among states and consolidating world peace.

In international affairs success in solving controversial problems
is possible provided the states concentrate on what brings states
closer together rather than on what divides the present-day world.
No social or political dissimilarities, no differences in ideology or
religious beliefs must prevent the member-states of the United Na-
tions from reaching agreement on the main thing: that the principles
of peaceful coexistence and friendly cooperation be sacredly and
unswervingly observed by all states. If, on the other hand, differ-
ences and social dissimilarities are pushed to the fore, it is bound to
doom to failure all our efforts to preserve peace. In the twentieth
century one cannot undertake crusades to wipe out unbelievers with
fire and sword, as the fanatics of the Middle Ages did, without run-
ning the risk of confronting humanity with the greatest calamity in
its history.

The United Nations is itself an embodiment of the idea of
peaceful cooperation between states with different social and politi-
cal systems. Indeed, see how many states there are belonging to
different social systems, what a multitude of races and nationalities,
what a diversity of philosophies and cultures are represented in this
hall!

But since the states differ in their evaluation of controversial
issues, since there are divergent views on the causes of the present
international tension, we have to be prepared for the elimination of

disagreements requiring persistent effort, patience and statesmanship
on the part of the governments. The time has come for the efforts of
the United Nations in strengthening peace to be supplemented by the
efforts of the heads of government of all states, by the efforts of the
broad masses of the people who stand for peace and international
security. Everything indicates that the time has come to open a
period of international negotiations, conferences and meetings of
statesmen in order that the pressing international problems may one
after another be solved.

For the principles of peaceful coexistence to become undividedly
established in the relations between states, it is necessary, in our
opinion, to put an end to the cold war. The peoples cannot allow the
unnatural states of cold war to continue any longer, as they cannot
allow epidemics of plague and cholera.

What does ending the cold war mean and what must be done
to accomplish it?

First of all, an end must be put to calls for war. There is no
getting away from the fact that belligerent speeches also continue
to be made by some short-sighted statesmen. Is it not time to put
a stop to saber-rattling and threats against other states?

The cold war is doubly dangerous because it is going on in the
conditions of an unbridled armaments race, which, growing like an
avalanche, is increasing suspicion and distrust among states.

Nor must it be forgotten that the cold war began and is pro-
ceeding at a time when the vestiges of the Second World War have
not yet been eliminated by any means, when a peace treaty with
Germany has not yet been concluded and an occupation regime is
still maintained in the heart of Germany, in Berlin, on the territory
of its Western sectors. The elimination of this source of tension in
the center of Europe, in the potentially most dangerous area of the
globe, where large armed forces of the opposing military alignments
are stationed in close contiguity, would furnish the key to normaliz-
ing the climate in the world. We appeal to the Governments of the
United States, Britain and France to exert every effort to reach
agreement on real steps to achieve this.

Who can deny that in ending the cold war and normalizing the
international climate great importance is attached to developing, in
every way, contacts between the peoples? We are for extending the
practice of mutual visits by statesmen, and also by representatives
of political, business and public circles, for developing international
economic, cultural, scientific and technical cooperation.

I should like to say that the United Nations will fulfill its noble
mission far more successfully if it is able to rid itself of the elements
of cold war which often handicap its activities. Isn't it the cold war
that has produced the intolerable situation wherein the Chinese
People's Republic, one of the biggest powers in the world, has for
many years now been denied its lawful rights in the United Nations?

It is inconceivable, after all, that anyone could seriously think
that a dependable and lasting solution of major world problems can
be achieved without the participation of the great People's China,
now approaching its glorious tenth anniversary.

Permit me to voice the following thoughts on this subject in all
frankness. Everyone knows that when a person dies he is eventually
buried. No matter how dear the deceased, no matter how it hurts to
part with him, life compels everyone to face up to the realities: A
coffin or a tomb is made for the dead, man and he is taken out of
the house of the living. So it was in ancient times and so it is today.
Why then must China be represented in the United Nations by the
corpse of reactionary China, that is, by the Chiang Kai-shek clique?
We consider that it is high time for the United Nations to deal with
a corpse as all peoples do, that is, carry it out, so that a real repre-
sentative of the Chinese people may take his rightful seat in the
united Nations. (Applause.)

After all, China is not Taiwan. Taiwan is only a small island, a
province, that is, a small part of a great state, China. China is the
Chinese People's Republic, which has for ten years now been devel-
oping rapidly, which has a stable government recognized by the
entire Chinese people, and legislative bodies elected by the entire
people of China. China is a great state whose capital is Peking. Sooner
or later Taiwan, as an inalienable part of the sovereign Chinese state,
will be united with the whole of People's China, that is, the authority
of the Government of the People's Republic of China will be ex-
tended to this island. And the sooner it is done, the better.

The restoration of the lawful rights of People's China will not
only enormously enhance the prestige and authority of the United
Nations, but will also be a notable contribution to improving the
international climate generally.

I should like to hope that the United Nations will find the
strength to get rid of all cold war accretions and become a really
universal organ of international cooperation working effectively for
world peace.

It may, however, be asked: Abolition of the cold war, consoli-
dation of peace, and the peaceful coexistence of states is, of course,
a supremely noble and attractive goal, but is it attainable, is it real-
istic? Can we at this time, in present-day conditions, place the rela-
tions between states on a new basis?

From this rostrum I emphatically declare that the Soviet Gov-
ernment considers the achievement of this goal not only urgent but
also entirely realistic. The Soviet Union is convinced that the neces-
sary conditions are now in evidence for a radical change for the better
in international relations, for the complete abolition of the cold war
in the interests of the whole of humanity.

Let us consider, if only briefly, the most important of the events
of recent months bearing on the problem of reducing international
tension.

The convocation in May 1959 of the Geneva foreign ministers'
conference, in which plenipotentiary representatives of the two Ger-
man states for the first time took part, was in itself the expression
of a new spirit in international relations, the spirit of realism and
mutual understanding. The results achieved in Geneva are, of course,
not yet such as could be considered sufficient for the practical solu-
tion of pressing international problems. But it is already something
that the detailed and frank discussion of the problems on the Geneva
conference agenda made it possible, as noted in the final communique
of the conference, to bring the positions of the sides on a number of
points closer together. In this way a fairly good foundation was laid
for further negotiations which can lead to agreement on the questions
that remain outstanding.

It is especially heartening that important steps have been taken
to develop Soviet-American relations. No one is likely to doubt that
the evolution of the international situation as a whole depends in no
small measure on how relations develop between the United States
and the Soviet Union, the two strongest powers in the world. That is
why even those first shoots of something new which have appeared
in Soviet-American relations of late meet with the most heartfelt
approval all over the world. The ice in Soviet-American relations has
undoubtedly begun to break, and of this we are sincerely glad.

Among the events making for improvement in Soviet-American
relations, the exchange of visits between the heads of government
of the USSR and the United States can prove a turning point We
have had, and will continue to have, an exchange of opinions with
the President of the United States on problems of Soviet-American

relations and on pressing international problems, We believe that Mr.
Eisenhower wishes to contribute to removing the tension in relations
between states.

At one of his news conferences the President of the United
States expressed a readiness to negotiate realistically with the Soviet
Union on a reasonable and mutually guaranteed plan for general
disarmament or disarmament in the field of special types of weapons,
to make a real beginning toward solving the problems of the divided
Germany, and to help in otherwise reducing tension in the world.
Permit me to express the hope that our exchange of views with
President Eisenhower will be fruitful

We belong to those who hope that the exchange of visits between
the leading statesmen of the United States and the USSR and the
forthcoming meetings and conversations will help to pave a straight
way to the complete ending of the cold war, provided, of course, there
is a mutual desire to achieve that That is how we regard our visit
to the United States and the coming visit of President Eisenhower
to the Soviet Union.

Many other facts could also be adduced which exemplify the
new favorable trends in world affairs.

Signs that relations between states are becoming warmer are
not, of course, a result of chance favorable circumstances.

The world, we think, is really entering a new phase of inter-
national relations. The grim years of the cold war cannot fail to
leave a mark on everyone. The ordinary people and political leaders
in many different countries have done much thinking and have
learned much. Everywhere the forces actively supporting peace and
friendly relations between the nations have grown immeasurably.

It would, of course, be unjustified optimism to assert that the
atmosphere of distrust and suspicion in the relations between states
is already a thing of the past, that peace in the world is already
secure, and that there is no need for further persistent efforts by aU
the states. Unfortunately, that is as yet by no means the case. Circles
which obstruct a relaxation of international tension and sow the
seeds of new conflicts are still active and influential in many coun-
tries. These people uphold the old, moribund state of affairs, they
cling to the legacy of the cold wan

But the course of events, especially of late, shows that attempts
to hinder relaxation of international tension, to put spokes in the
wheel, can only lead to the discomfiture of those who persist in such
attempts, for the peoples will not support them.

We live at a time when mankind is marching ahead with giant
strides, and we are witnessing not only the rapid development of
industry, science and engineering, but also rapid changes in the
political appearance of large areas of the world. Once backward
peoples are coming free of colonial dependence, and new independ-
ent states are arising in place of former colonies and semi-colonies.
Permit me to extend warm greetings from the bottom of my heart
to the representatives of those states present in this hall. (Applause.)

At the same time it should be admitted that not all the peoples
who have a right to be represented in the United Nations have their
representatives here as yet The Soviet Union, like all freedom-
loving nations, warmly wishes success to the peoples who still live
in colonial dependence but who are fighting resolutely for their
national liberation from the colonial yoke.

The last strongholds of the obsolete colonial system are crum-
bling, and crumbling badly, and this is one of the salient factors of
our time. Take a look at the map of Asia and Africa and you will
see hundreds of millions of people who have freed themselves of
centuries-old oppression by foreigners, of foreign exploitation.

Coming generations will esteem highly the heroism of those
who led the struggle for the independence of India and Indonesia,
the United Arab Republic and Iraq, Ghana, Guinea and other states,
just as the people of the United States today revere the memory of
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who led the American
people in their struggle for independence.

J deem it necessary to say here, from the rostrum of the United
Nations, that the Soviet Union has the sincerest sympathy and the
profoundest understanding for all peoples who, on different conti-
nents, are upholding their freedom and national independence. It is
my opinion that this position of ours fully accords with the princi-
ples of the United Nations Charter, which is predicated on recognition
of the right of the peoples to a free and independent existence and
development

Who but the United Nations should be the first to extend a
helping hand to peoples liberating themselves, to ensure their in-
alienable right to be masters of their own destiny and to shape their
life without any pressure or encroachment from without? And is it
not the duty of the United Nations to contribute to the utmost to
the economic advancement of the new states rising from the ruins
of the colonial system, to help them speedily build up their national
economies? This can only be achieved by the provision of large-scale

sconomic assistance without any political or other strings attached,
^iid that is the position taken by the Soviet Union on the question of
economic aid which we are rendering and intend to render in the
uture to many countries. This position, we feel, fully accords with
he principles of the United Nations Charter.

The Soviet Union would also be prepared to join with other
>owers in rendering economic assistance to the underdeveloped coun-
ries, as they are called, by using part of the resources that would be
nade available in the Soviet Union and other countries by the con-
clusion of an international agreement on disarmament and reduction
>f military budgets. We have already stated our readiness to assume
iuch an undertaking, and I am empowered by my government to
eaffirm it from the rostrum of the General Assembly.

There is another highly important source which, in our opinion,
should be drawn upon extensively to provide assistance to economi-
cally underdeveloped countries. The peoples of many of these coun-
ries have won political independence, but they are still cruelly
sxploited by foreigners economically. Their oil and other natural
vealth is plundered, it is taken out of the country for next to nothing,
gelding huge profits to foreign exploiters.

In common with the representatives of many other states, we
consider that in the question of economic aid one cannot put on a
par those who do not take part in the exploitation of former colonial
:ountries, and never did, and those who continue without any scru-
ples to squeeze wealth out of the underdeveloped countries. It would
>e right and just for the foreign exploiters to return at least part of
the riches they have amassed by exploiting the oppressed peoples,
jo that these funds, returned in the form of aid to the underdevel-
oped countries, be used for the development of their economy and
:ulture, for raising the living standards of their peoples.

The Soviet Union has been rendering and will continue to
render genuine, disinterested assistance to the underdeveloped coun-
tries. Rest assured of that

What preposterous survivals in these days are the various arti-
ficial obstacles to the full-blooded, all-round development of inter-
national trade! The entire system of discrimination in trade has long
deserved to be buried, and without any honors.

As you know, the Soviet Union has consistently advocated
maximum development of international trade on a basis of equality
and mutual benefit It is our deep conviction that trade provides a
good basis for developing peaceful cooperation among states, for

strengthening mutual confidence among nations. We consider that
this position accords completely with the United Nations Charter,
which obligates all member states to develop friendly relations among
nations on the basis of respect for the principle of equality and self-
determination of the peoples.

We, all of us, are faced with many outstanding international
problems. Not all of them are equally important or urgent. Some of
them concern the relations between individual countries, others affect
the interests of the peoples of a number of countries and continents.
But there is one problem whose solution is awaited with hope by
the people of all countries, large and small, whatever their social
system and way of life the problem of disarmament Whether man-
kind heads toward war with its disastrous consequences or whether
the cause of peace prevails depends largely on whether or not the
correct solution is found to that problem. The peoples long for peace,
they want to live without fear for their future, without fear of losing
their loved ones in the flames of another war.

For centuries the peoples have dreamed of getting rid of the
destructive weapons of war. The demand for disarmament has been
advanced and pressed by humanity's finest minds, the greatest public
leaders and statesmen, the parties closest to the working people. But
instead of disarmament the world has for many decades now been
convulsed by the armaments fever.

Who can honestly say that the arms race has helped to solve a
single, even the simplest international problem? On the contrary, it
only complicates and tangles the solution of all issues in dispute.

Never before in the history of mankind has the armaments drive
proceeded at such a pace and with such dangers as are involved
today, in the age of the atom, electronics and the conquest of outer
space.

Only recently rapid-fire automatic weapons, tanks, long-range
artillery and aerial bombs were regarded as the most terrible, the
most powerful instruments of annihilation. But can they stand any
comparison with the weapons available today? We have reached a
stage where it would be difficult to devise a weapon more powerful
than the hydrogen bomb, whose potential is practically unlimited.
If all the instruments of destruction mankind has possessed in the
past were put together, they would amount in power to only an
insignificant fraction of what the two or three Great Powers possess-
ing nuclear weapons have at their disposal today.

I shall not be disclosing any great secret when I say that the
explosion of one only one big hydrogen bomb releases a tremen-
dous energy of destruction. Recently I read some remarks by the
American nuclear physicist W. Davidson, stating that the explosion
of one hydrogen bomb releases more energy than all the explosions
effected by all countries in all the wars in the history of mankind.
And, by all indications, he is right. Can one disregard the fact that
the destructive power of the weapons of war has reached such colossal
proportions? And can one forget that there is not a spot on the globe
today that nuclear and rocket weapons cannot reach?

It is hard to imagine the consequences for mankind of a war
with the use of these monstrous instruments of destruction and
annihilation. If it were allowed to break out, its toll would run not
into millions, but into tens and even hundreds of millions of human
lives. It would be a war that would know no distinction between
front and rear, between combatants and children. Many large cities
and industrial centers would be reduced to ruins, and great monu-
ments of culture, created by the efforts of man's genius over cen-
turies, would be lost irreparably. Nor would this war spare future
generations. Its poisonous trail in the form of radioactive contamina-
tion would long continue to cripple people and claim many lives.

The situation in the world today is a dangerous one. Various
military alliances are in existence and the arms race never stops for
a moment So much inflammable material has accumulated that a

Speaking at the UN.

single spark could touch off a catastrophe. The world has reached a
point where war could become a fact owing to some stupid accident,
such as a technical fault in a plane carrying a hydrogen bomb or a
mental aberration in the pilot behind the controls.

It is well known, moreover, that the arms race is already a heavy
burden on the peoples. It is causing rising prices on consumer goods,
depressing real wages, harmfully affecting the economy of many
states, disrupting international trade. Never blfore have so many
states, such masses of people, been drawn into war preparations as
at present. If we consider, in addition to the military, the number of
people directly or indirectly connected with the production of arms
and involved in various forms of military research, we shall find that
over 100 million people and, moreover, the most capable and
energetic workers, scientists, engineers have been taken from their
peaceful pursuits. A vast fund of human energy, knowledge, ingenuity
and skill is being spilled as into a bottomless pit, consumed by the
growing armaments.

The annual military expenditures of all states today total
approximately 100 billion dollars. Is it not time to call a halt to this
senseless squandering of the people's means and the people's energies
for the preparation of war and destruction?

The Soviet Government, guided as it is in its foreign policy
by the principle of peaceful coexistence, stands for peace and friend-
ship among all nations. The aim of our domestic policy its one aim
is to create a life worthy of the best ideals of mankind. Our seven-
year plan is pervaded with the spirit of peaceableness, of concern for
the welfare and happiness of the people. The aim of our foreign
policy its one and invariable aim is to prevent war, to ensure
peace and security to our country and to all countries.

Some people in the West expected that the cold war would sap
the material resources of the Soviet Union and the other socialist
countries, would undermine their economy. But their calculations
have been wrong. Even though it has to bear a certain armaments
burden, the Soviet Union is able to ensure the rapid development
of its economy and the ever fuller satisfaction of the growing require-
ments of its people. Of course, the people's material requirements
would be more amply met if the arms burden were removed.

The Soviet Union is a resolute and consistent champion of
disarmament In our state there are no classes or groups interested
in war and armament building, in the conquest of foreign territories.
Everyone will agree that to accomplish the great tasks we have set

ourselves to improve the well-being of the Soviet people, to carry
out our economic construction plans we need peace. In common
with the other states who cherish peace, we would like to gear all our
"economy and resources to peaceful purposes in order to provide our
people in abundance with food, clothing, housing, etc. With the arms
race going on, however, we cannot undividedly devote our efforts to
peaceful construction without endangering the vital interests of our
people, the interests of the country's security.

All peoples need peace. Following the conclusion of the Second
World War, the Soviet Union submitted concrete disarmament pro-
posals to the United Nations. We proposed the complete prohibition
of atomic weapons, a substantial reduction of armed forces and arma-
ments, and a steep cut in arms expenditures. We urged the disman-
tling of military bases on foreign territory and the withdrawal of
armed forces from foreign territories.

We have proved our desire to solve the disarmament problem
by deeds, and not just words. Time and again the Soviet Union has
taken the initiative and undertaken concrete steps toward ending the
arms race and getting down with all speed to practical disarmament
measures. Immediately after the end of the war, our country carried
out an extensive demobilization of its armed forces. The Soviet Union
has given up all the military bases it had after the Second World
War on the territory of other states.

You will recall that in the past few years the Soviet armed
forces have been reduced, unilaterally, by a total of over two million
men. The Soviet forces in the German Democratic Republic have
been reduced considerably, and all Soviet troops have been with-
drawn from the Rumanian People's Republic. We have also made a
substantial cut in our military expenditures.

In 1958 the Soviet Union unilaterally suspended tests of atomic
and hydrogen weapons hi the hope that the other powers would
follow this noble example. It is only to be regretted that these hopes
were not justified Now the Soviet Government has decided not to
resume nuclear explosions in the Soviet Union if the Western Powers
do not resunie atomic and hydrogen weapon tests. Only if they
resume tests of nuclear weapons will the Soviet Union consider itself
free of this commitment

The disarmament problem has been under discussion for over
fourteen years now in the United Nations and at other international
meetings, but no practical results have yet been achieved What is
the reason? I should not like to rake over the past, to go into an

analysis of the obstacles and differences that arose in the course of
the disarmament talks, much less to bring accusations against any-
one. That is not the important thing now. The important thing, we
are profoundly convinced, is to remove the main road blocks piled
up in the way of disarmament, to try to find a new approach to the
solution of the problem.

The record of the disarmament talks shows plainly that the
question of control has been put forward as one of the main obstacles
to agreement We were and are for strict international control over
the implementation of the disarmament agreement, when it is
reached. But we have always been against the control system being
divorced from actual measures of disarmament, against the control
organs becoming, in effect, organs for the collection of intelligence
information while there would in fact be no disarmament

We are for genuine controlled disarmament, but we are against
control without disarmament The opponents of disarmament can
easily make any measure conditional upon control provisions that
other states will be unable to accept in the conditions of a universal
arms race. The countries which, for one reason or another, advance
such far-reaching control demands would themselves most probably
be disinclined to accept these demands if it came to carrying them
out

There is yet another difficulty. So long as disarmament is con-
ceived as only partial and some armaments are to remain after the
conclusion of the disarmament agreement, it would still leave states
the material possibility of attacking. There would always be the fear
that with these remaining types of armaments and armed forces an
attack could still be committed. The knowledge that such a possibility
would remain hampered the disarmament negotiations in no small
measure

Many states feared that the disarmament measures would affect
precisely those types of armaments in which they have the greatest
advantage and which they believe to be particularly necessary to
themselves. Naturally, under these conditions, in an atmosphere of
cold war and mutual suspicion, no state, speaking seriously and not
for propaganda, could reveal its military secrets, the organization of
its defense and war production, without prejudicing the interests of
its national security.

AH the delegates will, I am sure, agree that the collective reason
of all states, as well as of the United Nations, must be focused on
finding a new approach to the solution of the disarmament problem.

The task is to find a lever which would make it possible to stop
mankind from sliding into the abyss of war. What is essential now
is to rule out the very possibility of wars being started So long as
there exist large armies, air forces and navies, nuclear and rocket
weapons, so long as young men on the threshold of life are first of
all taught the art of warfare and general staffs are busy working out
plans for future military operations, there is no guarantee of stable
peace.

The Soviet Government, having comprehensively considered
the situation, has come to the firm conviction that the way out of
the deadlock should be sought along the lines of general and com-
plete disarmament. With such an approach, the possibility of any
military advantages being created for any states is completely ruled
out It is general and complete disarmament that will remove all the
barriers raised during the discussions on partial disarmament and
clear the way for the establishment of comprehensive 9 complete
control.

What does the Soviet Government propose?

The essence of our proposals is that over a period of four years
all states should effect complete disarmament and thereafter no
longer possess any means of waging war.

This means that land armies, navies and air forces would cease
to exist, general staffs and war ministries would be abolished, mili-
tary training establishments would be closed Tens of millions of
men would return to peaceful constructive labor.

Military bases on foreign territory would be dismantled

All atomic and hydrogen bombs in the possession of states
would be destroyed and their further production discontinued The
energy of fissionable materials would be used exclusively for peaceful
economic and scientific purposes.

Military rockets of all ranges would be eliminated and rockets
would remain only as a means of transportation and of the conquest
of outer space for the good of all mankind

The states would retain only strictly limited contingents of
police (militia) agreed upon for each country, equipped with small
arms and designed exclusively to maintain internal order and protect
the personal security of citizens.

So that no one could violate his obligations, we propose the
establishment of an international control body comprised of all states.
A system of control over all disarmament measures should be set up

which should be instituted and should function according to the
stages by which disarmament is to be effected

If disarmament is comprehensive and complete, then upon its
consummation control will also be general and complete. States will
have nothing to conceal from one another: None of them will possess
weapons that could be used against another, and no restraints will
be imposed on the controllers' zeal.

This solution of disarmament questions would ensure the com-
plete security of all states. It would create favorable conditions for
the peaceful coexistence of states. All international issues would then
be resolved not by force of arms but by peaceful means.

We are realists in politics and understand that working out such
a broad disarmament program will take some time. While such a
program is being elaborated, while matters are being agreed, we
must not sit with folded arms and wait

The Soviet Government considers that the elaboration of a
program of general and complete disarmament should not hottf up
the settlement of so acute and entirely ripe a question as the dis-
continuance of nuclear weapon tests for all time. All the prerequisites
for settling it are now in evidence. We hope that an appropriate
agreement on the discontinuance of tests will be concluded and put
into effect without delay.

The danger of a nuclear-rocket war which threatens the peoples
calls for bold, far-reaching solutions to ensure peace.

A decision to effect general and complete disarmament at an
early date and the implementation of that decision would usher in
a new state in international life. The agreement of states to un-
dertake general and complete disarmament would be convincing,
practical proof of the absence of any aggressive designs on their part
and of a sincere desire to base their relations with other states on
friendship and cooperation. With the destruction of weapons and the
abolition of armed forces, no material possibilities would remain for
states to pursue any policy other than that of peace.

Qn achieving complete disarmament, mankind would feel as
does an exhausted desert traveler, tormented by fear of dying from
thirst and exhaustion, when after long weary wanderings he reaches
an oasis.

General and complete disarmament would allow enormous
material and financial resources to be switched from the manufac-
ture of weapons of death to constructive purposes. Human energy

could be directed to the creation of material and spiritual values
beautifying and ennobling man's life and work

The implementation of a program of general and complete
disarmament would make it possible to shift enormous sums to the
building of schools, hospitals, homes, roads, to the production of
foodstuffs and manufactured goods. The money released would allow
taxes to be substantially reduced and prices lowered This would
have a beneficial effect on the living standards of the population and
would be welcomed by millions of ordinary people. The funds spent
by the states for military needs over the last decade alone would
suffice to build over 150 million houses which could comfortably
accommodate many hundreds of millions of people.

General and complete disarmament would also create entirely
new opportunities for aid to the countries whose economies are still
underdeveloped and who need assistance from the more developed
countries. Even if only a small part of the money released by the
termination of the military expenditures of the Great Powers were
devoted to such aid, it could open up literally a new epoch in the
economic development of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

All the artificial obstacles to the development of international
trade which today exist in the form of discriminatory restrictions,
embargo lists, etc., would disappear. The industries of such nations
as the U.S A, Britain, France, West Germany and other highly devel-
oped countries could at last receive large orders from other states.
The utilization of the funds released by disarmament would provide
the widest employment opportunities. That is why the claims that
disarmament would bring on a crisis or economic recession in the
highly developed industrial countries of the capitalist world are
unfounded

When no country has the actual means of undertaking military
action against other countries, international relations will develop
in a spirit of confidence. Suspicion and fear will vanish, all nations
will be able to treat each other like genuine good neighbors. The
doors will open wide for economic, commercial and cultural co-
operation among all states. For the first time the secure and stable
peace that all peoples so eagerly desire will become a reality.

Convinced that by the joint efforts of all the countries united
in the name of the peaceful principles of the United Nations Charter
these great aims can and must be achieved, the Government of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics submits for the consideration of

the United Nations a Declaration on General and Complete Disarm-
ament containing concrete proposals on the subject.

It goes without saying that if for any reason the Western
Powers do not evince a readiness at present to embark on general
and complete disarmament, the Soviet Government is prepared to
reach agreement with other states on appropriate measures for partial
disarmament and the strengthening of security. The chief of these,
in the Soviet Government's opinion, are:

1) The creation of a control and inspection zone with a reduc-
tion of foreign troops on the territory of the West European countries
concerned;

2) The creation of an atom-free zone in Central Europe;

3) The withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of
European states and the dismantling of military bases on foreign
territory;

4) The conclusion of a nonaggression pact between the member-
states of NATO and of the Warsaw Treaty;

5) An agreement on the prevention of surprise attack by one
state on another.

The Soviet Government thinks it appropriate to recall its dis-
armament proposals of May 10, 1955, containing concrete ideas
concerning partial disarmament measures. It is convinced that these
proposals are a good basis for agreement on this vitally important
problem.

This is not the first time the Soviet Union has advanced the idea
of general and complete disarmament As far back as the period
between the First and Second World Wars the government of our
country came forward with a comprehensive program of complete
disarmament At that time the opponents of disarmament were wont
to assert that the Soviet Union had put forward these proposals
because it was an economically and militarily weak country. If in
those days this false thesis could perhaps delude some, it is now
evident to all that talk of any weakness of the Soviet Union is absurd.

The new proposal of the Soviet Government is prompted by the
sole desire to ensure truly lasting peace among nations.

We say sincerely to all countries: In contrast to the "Let us
arm!" slogan, still current in some quarters, we put forward the
slogan "Let us completely disarm!" Let us rather compete in who
builds more homes, schools and hospitals for the people; produces
more grain, milk, meat, clothing and other consumer goods; and not

in who has more hydrogen bombs and rockets. This will be welcomed
by all the peoples of the world

Gentlemen, the United Nations, whose General Assembly I to-
day have the honor of addressing, can and should play a large part
in international affairs. Its importance derives from the fact that
nearly all the nations of the world are represented in it. They have
united to consider jointly the pressing problems of international rela-
tions. If two or more states are unable to agree among themselves,
the United Nations should help them. Its role in such cases is to
smooth the rough edges in relations between states, which can lead
to disputes, to tensions and even to wars. By performing its cardinal
function of strengthening world peace and security, the United Na-
tions will win the respect it should enjoy, and its prestige will grow.

But I have to say in all frankness that at present the United
Nations in some cases, unfortunately, does not perform these func-
tions. Sometimes, by a wrong approach in the UN, needless tension
is actually created between states.

Why does this happen? Because not all UN member-states
treat with due respect this organization in which mankind reposes
such hopes. Instead of constantly reinforcing the prestige of the
United Nations, so that it may really be the most authoritative
international organ to which the governments of all countries could
apply whenever in need of getting some vital problem solved, some
states seek to use it in their own narrow interests. Naturally an inter-
national organization cannot work effectively for peace if there is
within it a group of countries which seek to impose their will on
others. That kind of policy will undermine the foundations of the
United Nations. If things should continue to develop along these
lines, which might be called factional, this would lead to deteriora-
tion of relations between states instead of improving them. From an
organ expressing the interests of all its members, the United Nations
would become the organ of a group of states, pursuing the policy of
that group and not the policy of safeguarding world peace. This
would in the initial stage engender disrespect for the United Nations
and then might lead to its break-up, as happened to the League of
Nations in its day.

The distinguishing characteristic of a properly functioning inter-
national organ is that questions ought to be settled there not by a
formal count of votes but by a reasonable and patient quest for a
just solution acceptable to alL After all, one cannot expect countries
against whose will an unjust decision is taken to agree to carry it

out It leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. Recall how many such in-
stances there have been in the history of the United Nations! There-
fore, the United Nations should pass only such decisions as all will
vote for, seeing in them an expression of the common will and the
common interest. Such decisions would be recognized as the only
correct and the only possible ones both by our generation and by
future historians.

Naturally, a group of states which at a given moment commands
a majority can put through the decision it wants. But this is a
Pyrrhic victory. Such "victories" injure the United Nations, they
disrupt it

It should also be borne in mind that in the voting of one
question or another the majority in the United Nations is a variable
quantity. It could change against those who today so often bank on
the voting machine. As the Russian saying goes, "You reap what you
sow." And so, the wisest and most far-sighted policy is one of seeking
jointly for mutually acceptable decisions stemming exclusively from
concern for safeguarding world peace and noninterference in the
internal affairs of other nations.

When the Security Council was being established in the UN,
the idea of agreed decisions was made the basis of its work. And
a special responsibility for the maintenance of peace was laid upon
the Great Powers, whose representatives are permanent members of
the Security Council It was found necessary, in order to avoid com-
plications in international relations, to establish the principle of
Great Power unanimity in the Security Council, known as the veto
power.

Some people are against the veto. But if there were no veto
there would be no international organization, it would fall to pieces.
The veto principle obliges the Great Powers to reach a unanimous
decision on all matters before the Security Council that ensures the
effective maintenance of peace. It is better to seek unanimous deci-
sions of the Great Powers than to settle international issues by force
of arms.

Gentlemen, I have tried to state frankly some ideas concerning
the international situation and also concerning our understanding
of the tasks of the United Nations. We are sure that the proposals
we have set forth on the instructions of the Soviet Government will
be received with sympathy by the majority of the people of all
countries and by the delegates sitting in this hall.

I should like to assure the delegates to the General Assembly
that in the Soviet Union the United Nations will continue to have
a most active participant in all endeavors to rid mankind of the
burden of armaments and to consolidate world peace. Thank you,
gentlemen. (Stormy applause.)

DECLARATION OF THE SOVIET GOVERNMENT

Agreement among the states on the limitation and destruction
of the weapons of war has for many years been the cherished dream
of mankind Public leaders and statesmen, and the parties closest
to the working people, advanced and pressed the demand for dis-
armament long before mankind experienced the horrors of world
wars.

All nations, large and small, irrespective of their social systems
and way of life are interested in the adoption of effective disarma-
ment measures. There are no peoples today who do not feel a deep
anxiety in the face of the rivalry of states in armaments, a rivalry
which has become truly unprecedented, especially in the field of
developing ever more destructive and lethal weapons; and they have
no more fervent desire than to put an end to this rivalry which is
fraught with grievous consequences for the destiny of the world

GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMAMENT
IS THE WAY TO DELIVER MANKIND
FROM THE SCOURGE OF WAR

The armaments race has impressed itself upon men's minds
as a specter that is always the forerunner of war. So it was when
Europe, convulsed by the armaments fever, moved step by step
toward the First World War. And so it was again in the thirties,
when in a number of countries everything was subordinated to the
slogan "Guns before butter" and the arsenals were again packed to
bursting. Everyone knows what came of it. The peoples were plunged
into the Second World War, which brought them misfortune and
suffering that caused everything that mankind had endured in the
darkest periods of its history to pale into insignificance.

The war ended, but people still did not gain peace of mind.
Practically the very next day after the roar of the last battles sub-
sided, the world was again seized by the armaments fever which was,

this time, far more dangerous to mankind, since the preparations Were
for nuclear war.

Never before has the armaments race been fraught with such
danger as today, in the age of the atom, electronics and the conquest
of outer space.

However terrible such earlier instruments of annihilation as
rapid-fire automatic weapons, tanks, long-range artillery and aircraft
bombs many have seemed to be, they stand no comparison with
atomic and hydrogen weapons and rockets. If all the instruments of
destruction mankind possessed over the centuries were put together,
they would amount to only an insignificant fraction of what the two
or three nuclear powers have at their disposal today.

Indeed, it is known that the explosion of a single large modern
hydrogen bomb releases a destructive energy surpassing that of all
the explosives manufactured in the whole world in four years of
the Second World War.

The introduction of atomic and rocket weapons into the arma-
ments of armies, the training of servicemen in their use, and the
adaptation of the strategy and tactics of warfare to the new weapons
have already progressed so far that the next military conflict among
the powers threatens to turn into a war with the employment of all
the instruments of destruction at the belligerents' command. Outer
space, unattainable to man just a couple of years ago, can now be
used, like the seas and air before, for delivering a nuclear attack
against any point of the globe.

Both World Wars began between countries which were neigh-
bors and had a common frontier. But now war can break out between
countries which are many thousands of kilometers apart, and can
draw whole continents into its orbit.

In such a war, if it is not averted in time, distances would be
measured in thousands and tens of thousands of kilometers, time in
minutes and seconds, and losses in millions and tens and hundreds
of millions of human lives. It would be a war that would know no
distinction between front and rear, between active armies and civilian
populations, between soldiers and children.

The Appearance of military alliances which girdle almost the
entire globe and which bristle with armaments against each other has
produced a situation where a small spark, an incident of seemingly
local significance, would be enough to touch off a war conflagration.
And if up to now the concatenated system of military commitments

has not been put into motion, if the brakes have held out, there is
and can be no guarantee that it will not happen in the future.

Never before have so many states and such masses of people
been drawn into war preparations as at present There are tens of
millions of men under arms, and when to these are added those who
are directly or indirectly connected with the production of arma-
ments, military research and other activities designed to supply and
service the armies, it emerges that hundreds of millions of people
have been taken from the labors of peace. A vast fund of human
energy, knowledge, ingenuity and skill is being spilled as into a
bottomless pit, consumed by the growing armaments.

The armaments race has extended to countries which economi-
cally cannot carry the burden of armaments, while militarily their
very existence is jeopardized by it Military bases on foreign terri-
tory, armed forces stationed thousands of kilometers from their own
frontiers are palpable proof of that

Moreover, the stockpiling of mass destruction weapons in the
arsenals of some powers and the advancement of air, naval and rocket
bases toward the frontiers of other states compel the states against
which these war preparations are being conducted to adopt the
measures necessary to strengthen their security and safeguard a
life of peace for their peoples. The Soviet Union and all the socialist
countries, and also many other states who cherish peace, would wish
to gear all of their economy and resources to peaceful purposes w
order to provide their people abundantly with food, clothing and
housing. But they cannot undividedly devote their efforts to peaceful
construction without mortally endangering the vital interests of theii
peoples and their very existence. The arming of one side compels
the other side to act likewise. The quantities of mass destruction
weapons keep growing and with them grows the danger of a militars
explosion.

Today atomic and hydrogen bombs are not only stored at ultra
secret depots. They are carried by bombers that make flights ovei
the territory of many West European countries. The situation is
developing in such a way that super-powerful and super-long-rang*
weapons could be discharged not only on the orders of governments
but at the will of the individuals at the control panel of thos
weapons. But a state on whose territory a nuclear load is dropped
whether by evil intent or owing to a technical fault or other accident
is hardly, going to investigate how it happened, but will be obliged t<
react to it as to a military attack, as to the unleashing of war. Cai

it be permitted that the question peace or war should be left to
the mercy of blind chance? Is not all this added proof that the road
of armaments can be followed no further? The Soviet Union by no
means accepts armaments rivalry as a fatal inevitability, eternally
bound to accompany the relations between states. In its foreign
policy the Soviet Government has been acting upon the conviction
that it is possible to prevent the development of human society from
continuing along the road which has led to two world wars, that it is
possible to ensure that its history shall no longer be, as hitherto, a
record of sanguinary wars.

Weapons are created by the hands of man. Those same hands
can destroy them.

It is about fourteen years now that the disarmament problem
has been under discussion in the United Nations. Before that, it was
discussed for many years by the League of Nations and the disarma-
ment conference it convened. However, there are to this day no
practical results, in the sense of any decisions agreed among the states.

Much could be said about the reasons for this unfortunate state
of the disarmament question. However, the important thing now is
not to rake over the past and aggravate the polemics, but to remove
the chief obstacles that frustrated all previous attempts to reach
agreement on disarmament.

The record of many years of disarmament negotiations shows
that the question of control over disarmament was put forward as
one of the main obstacles to such agreement

The Soviet Government stands, and always has stood, for strict
international control over the fulfillment of agreements on disarma-
ment measures, when such agreements are achieved All Soviet pro-
posals for banning atomic weapons and tests, and also for the
reduction of conventional armaments and armed forces, were invari-
ably accompanied by specific proposals for effective control on an
international basis. But the Soviet Government has always been
against the control system being made a program of measures
divorced from any actual disarmament, and all the more against the
control organs becoming organs for the collection of intelligence on
the armaments of states while there would in fact be no disarmament
However, besides the complications introduced into the control
problem artificially, there are also real difficulties attaching to the
establishment of control under present conditions. They will be seen
clearly enough if we take, for instance, the problem of banning and
eliminating nuclear weapons.

It is well known that the same fissionable materials can be used
at appropriate enterprises both for the production of nuclear weapons
and for peaceful purposes. This means that in the present circum-
stances, with atomic energy being ever more widely used in the
economy, there is a possibility of part of the fissionable materials
being secretly channeled to the production of weapons.

To be completely free in the existing atmosphere of distrust
of suspicion of this or that state secretly using atomic materials for
military purposes, it would be necessary to grant foreign controllers
access to a great number of enterprises in every country, amounting,
in fact, to a variety of foreign guardianship over an important branch
of its economy. But on account of this same reason and the distrust
prevailing among the states, no state can show itself willing to admit
foreign controllers and inspectors to its enterprises, especially to those
engaged in military production.

It is obvious that in the present state of affairs, with the con-
tinuing armaments race, tension in international relations and lack
of confidence, the conditions necessary for establishing comprehensive
controls are not in evidenca

So long as distrust prevails among the states, the opponents
of disarmament can easily make any disarmament measure condi-
tional upon such control provisions as other states will be unable to
accept For that matter, the states which for, one reason or another
advance such far-reaching demands as to the powers of the control
bodies actually would not have any inclination themselves to accept
such control provisions if it came to carrying them out

That being the position, to put forward deliberately exaggerated
demands as regards control, and, all the more, to put control before
disarmament, making it a preliminary condition of any disarmament
measures, is tantamount to blocking all approaches to the solution of
the problem.

The Soviet Government considers that the time has come to
evaluate the situation soberly and to recognize that since the ap-
proach so far applied to the solution of the disarmament problem
has failed to produce results, the logical conclusion must be drawn
from that fact That conclusion, in the opinion of the Soviet Govern-
ment, can only be that it is the duty of all states, as also of the United
Nations, to find without delay a new way to go about solving the
disarmament problem, the burning problem of our time.

What is this new way? What must be done to put an end to a
position where a huge proportion of the wealth taken by man from

it be permitted that the qtiestionr-peace or war should be left to
the mercy of blind chance? Is not all this added proof that the road
of armaments can be followed no further? The Soviet Union by no
means accepts armaments rivalry as a fatal inevitability, eternally
bound to accompany the relations between states. In its foreign
policy the Soviet Government has been acting upon the conviction
that it is possible to prevent the development of human society from
continuing along the road which has led to two world wars, that it is
possible to ensure that its history shall no longer be, as hitherto, a
record of sanguinary wars.

Weapons are created by the hands of man. Those same hands
can destroy them.

It is about fourteen years now that the disarmament problem
has been under discussion in the United Nations. Before that, it was
discussed for many years by the League of Nations and the disarma-
ment conference it convened However, there are to this day no
practical results, in the sense of any decisions agreed among the states.

The record of many years of disarmament negotiations shows
that the question of control over disarmament was put forward as
one of the main obstacles to such agreement.

However, besides the complications introduced into the control
problem artificially, there are also real difficulties attaching to the
establishment of control under present conditions. They will be seen
clearly enough if we take, for instance, the problem of banning and
eliminating nuclear weapons.

The Soviet Government considers that the tune has come to
evaluate the situation soberly and to recognize that since the ap-
proach so far applied to the solution of the disarmament problem
has failed to produce results, the logical conclusion must be drawn
from that fact That conclusion, in the opinion of the Soviet Govern-
ment, can only be that it is the duty of all states, as also of the United
Nations, to find without delay a new way to go about solving the
disarmament problem, the burning problem of our time.

What is this new way? What must be done to put an end to a
position where a huge proportion of the wealth taken by man from

nature, created by the genius of scientists, the skill of engineers, the
efforts of millions and millions of working people is squandered on
instruments of death and destruction? What must be done to prevent
tens of millions of men in the prime of their creative energies from
being taken from productive endeavors for service in the armed
forces, for the preparation of a devastating war?

By now the majority of statesmen and public leaders, as well
as the broad masses of the population in all countries, have already
come to realke that a new world war would be a terrible tragedy
for all, and for some countries with relatively small territories and a
"high density of population, a disaster threatening their very existence.

The task now is to find a lever by grasping which it will be
possible to stop mankind from sliding into the abyss of a nuclear-
missile war.

With the present nature of international relations and the
present level of military technology, when any military conflict can
ted to a nuclear-missile war, a radical solution of the problem of
security for all states involves precluding the very possibility of
wars being started So long as there exist large armies, air forces and
navies, nuclear and missile weapons, so long as young men on the
threshold of life are first of all taught the art of warfare and general
staffs are busy working out plans of future military operations, there
is and can be no secure peace among nations in the present situation.
Not equilibrium in armaments, which every state tries to interpret
and turn to its own advantage, but a position where the states will
not have the material means of waging war that is the most effec-
tive and solid guarantee of peace that meets not only remote ideals
but the urgent demands of the people.

After thoroughly assessing the present international situation
and the experience of previous disarmament negotiations, the Gov-
ernment of the Soviet Union has arrived at the conviction that the
surest way to a practical solution of the cardinal international prob-
lem of our day ^the disarmament problem is the way of general
and complete disarmament of all states.

By general and complete disarmament the Soviet Government
means the renunciation by aU states without exception of the main-
tenance of any armed lorces save for minimum internal security
contingents (militia, police) equipped with small arms and designed
to maintain order within each country.

This means that land armies, navies and air forces will cease
to exist; general staffs and war ministries will be abolished; military

training establishments will be closed Tens of millions of men
return to peaceful constructive labor.

The foreign military bases now existing on the territory of a
number of states, which injure the sovereignty and security of those
states and do untold harm to the cause of international confidence
and cooperation among all nations, will be dismantled

All atomic and hydrogen bombs in the possession of states will
be destroyed and their further production discontinued Hie energy
of fissionable materials will be used exclusively for peaceful economic
and scientific purposes.

Military rockets of all ranges will be eliminated and rockets
will remain only as a means of transportation and of the conquest
of outer space for the good of all mankind

Guns, tanks, shells, torpedoes will be melted down to provide
more metal for peaceful construction. Warships and military aiitraft
will be scrapped

The stockpiles of chemical and bacteriological weapons accumu-
lated by some states poison gases and asphyxiants, cultures of
lethal germs, potential sources of dangerous epidemic diseases all
this will be destroyed conclusively, without a trace and for all time.

Such is the program of disarmament which the Soviet Gov-
ernment submits for the consideration of all states, and firslt of all
of the UN members, and proposes that its implementation be started
without delay.

This is a radical program, but precisely therein lies the guaran-
tee of its feasibility under present conditions. The existence of oppos-
ing alignments in which dozens of states are bound by mutual mili-
tary commitments, the fantastically rapid development of military
technology all this requires bold, far-reaching solutions to ensure
peace.

The proposal for complete and general disarmament differs
from all other disarmament proposals in that its realization abso-
lutely rules out any inequality of conditions, the possibiEty of any
military advantages for any state or states.

No one is likely to deny that if the radical decision were taken
to carry out within a short fixed term complete and general disarm-
ament of all the states, and if it were put into practice, the entire
international situation would change fundamentally. The relations
between states, including countries belonging to different social sys-
tems and to opposing military-political alignments, would be pot on
an utterly new basis.

Fear of possible aggression on the part of this or that state
would, in effect, be eliminated. The readiness of states to undertake
general complete disarmament would be convincing practical proof
of the absence of any aggressive designs on their part and of their
sincere desire to base their relations with other states on the principle
of peaceful coexistence; and with the destruction of armaments and
the abolition of armed forces, no physical possibility would remain
for states to pursue any policy other than a peaceable one. The
destruction of the war weapons would provide a still firmer basis for
peaceful coexistence between states, since any other line in the
development of international relations would be completely pre-
cluded

Under general and complete disarmament the distinction be-
tween the victors and vanquished of the last war would be obliter-
ated The importance and international influence of the powers would
be determined not by their military might but by the degree of their
partieipation in creating the material and spiritual values that enrich
mankind. It would not be the number of divisions, bombers or
rockets, not the tonnage of surface or submarine navies, nor stock-
piles of atomic and hydrogen bombs, but achievements in the pro-
duction of material wealth, in the improvement of people's conditions
of life and work, in the struggle for the prolongation of man's life
span, that would then serve as the measure of the prestige of states
and their contribution to the history of mankind

Of course, even after the fulfillment of the general disarmament
program differences between states, particularly between states with
different social and economic systems, will remain. These differences
will not, however, be resolved through military clashes, but only by
peaceful economic competition, by the struggle of ideas and by other
peaceful means as prescribed by the United Nations Charter.

Under the conditions of general and complete disarmament the
difficulties connected with control will also disappear. Under these
conditions the states will have nothing to conceal from each other.
There will be every .possibility to carry out any checks, any inspec-
tion if any doubt arises about the good faith of this or that state in
the fulfillment of its disarmament obligations.

In other words, a decision to effect general complete disarma-
ment would at last allow a way to be found out of the vicious circle
of distrust between the states, which now fetters them in their nego-
tiations of partial disarmament measures and prevents even one real
step forward being made in this field

When general complete disarmament becomes a fact, different
and much more favorable conditions will also arise for solving many
complicated political problems which still remain outstanding, among
them European problems.

Lastly, general complete disarmament would open before all
countries new vistas in the field of their economic development

There would arise opportunities hitherto unseen to rapidly im-
prove the living standards of all nations by putting to good use the
money which is now being spent by the states for the maintenance
of armed forces and the manufacture of weapons.

Opponents of disarmament not infrequently try to discredit the
very idea of disarmament by alleging that the discontinuance of
weapons manufacture would be bound to cause economic difficulties
and deprive of employment many people now engaged in the mili-
tary industries. But to put the matter in this way is a deliberate
deception.

Do not the lethal weapons being manufactured at present con-
sume fabulous sums of public money which could be used to build
homes for the people, new schools for their children, free hospitals
for those who need medical treatment, and for instituting or increas-
ing pensions for the aged and disabled? Would not the utilization
of these funds for peaceful purposes create the broadest employment
opportunities?

There can be no doubt that general and complete disarmament
would permit the creation of conditions for such material and spiritual
progress in all countries as would exceed by many times the existing
rates of their development The billions that would pour in a mighty
torrent into the civil economies as a result of the discontinuance of
military expenditures would be utilized in new and far more favor-
able conditions than those obtaining now. The artificial partitions by
which states are presently isolating themselves from one another,
protecting their achievements in science and technology out of mil*-
tary and strategic considerations, would gradually disappear. Scien-
tists in all countries would be able to work exclusively for the good
of man, for the improvement of his Ufa Unhampered exchange of
experience would stimulate scientific, technical and economic prog-
ress in each individual country and all countries taken together.

Were all states to pool their efforts and allocate the funds
necessary for launching an all-out offensive against such enemies of
man as cancer and some other dangerous diseases still difficult to

cure, these would be brought under control in a short time. General
disarmament would create the prerequisites for such pooling of
efforts in the fight for man's health.

One of the results of the growth of confidence among the states
in the conditions of general and complete disarmament would be the
broad development of international trade. The artificial obstacles to
the development of this trade which are now created by certain
powers in the form of discriminatory restrictions, embargo lists, etc.,
would disappear. The industries of such countries as the USA,
Britain, West Germany and France would be able finally to avail
themselves of the ample opportunities for obtaining large orders
from other states. Mutually beneficial trade would have a favorable
effect on the economy of the trading nations.

General and complete disarmament would also create entirely
new opportunities for aid to the countries whose economies are at
present still underdeveloped and need assistance from more ad-
vanced countries. Even if only a small part of the funds released by
the termination of the military expenditures of the Great Powers
were devoted to such aid, it could usher in a new era in the economic
development of Asia, Africa and Latin America

It will suffice to cite the following example:

The construction of the Aswan High Dam and the Nile hydro-
electric installations connected with it, which has been started in the
Egyptian part of the United Arab Republic, is probably the largest
construction project being carried out at present in any of the under-
developed states of Africa or Asia If general and complete disarma-
ment is put into effect and the highly developed industrial countries
allocate, say, 10 per cent of the funds thus saved for assistance to
underdeveloped countries, such allocations from the budgets of two
powers alone the USA and the Soviet Union would be enough to
build several such dams annually.

The direct military expenditures of the member-states of the
NATO military bloc in 1958 alone reached the sum of 60 billion
dollars. If one-tenth of this sum were used for assistance to under-
developed countries, it Would make possible the annual construction
of more than ten metallurgical plants similar to those now being
built in India

Such are the potentialities for assisting the economic rise of the
underdeveloped countries in conditions of general and complete dis~-

armament The Soviet Union stands for utilizing these potentialities
to the fullest

This is not the first time the idea of general and complete dis-
armament has been put forward. The Soviet Government advanced
proposals on this score as far back as the period between the two
World Wars. The interests of rival groups of powers which sought
to direct the military might of the aggressive states against the only
socialist state then in existence prevented the adoption of this Soviet
proposal, and this led to disastrous consequences for the world.

The opponents of the proposals for general and complete dis-
armament were wont to allege at that time that the Soviet Union
made those proposals because it was an economically and militarily
weak country. If in those days this false thesis could perhaps mislead
some, it is obvious to all now that talk about any weakness of the
Soviet Union is absurd and that the new Soviet proposal for general
and complete disarmament is prompted by the sole desire to promote
truly lasting peace among the nations.

The Soviet Union, the Chinese People's Republic, all the social-
ist countries are emphatically opposed to war and the manufacture
of the weapons of war. But it would be wrong to think that states
with a different social system have no reason to sincerely and unre-
servedly support the proposal for general and complete disarmament
Destruction of the weapons of war cannot and will not run counter
to the national interests of any state. No government, if it really
cares about the future of its country and its people, can take a
negative stand on the proposal for general and complete disarmament

There are more than a hundred states on the political map of
the world. These states have attained different levels of economic
development, they have different social and political systems, they
differ in their people's living conditions and standards of culture. But
despite all the diversity of conditions under which people in different
countries live, there is one thing they have in common: the desire to
prevent another war, to establish eternal peace in the world. When
no state has the actual wherewithal to launch hostilities against other
states, the development of international relations will be marked by
sincere confidence.

Convinced that by the joint efforts of all the states united in
the name of the peaceful principles of the United Nations Charter
all these great aims can and must be achieved, the Government of
the USSR submits for consideration by the United Nations the
proposal for general and complete disarmament

PROGRAM OF GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMAMENT

The program of general and complete disarmament should in-
clude the following measures:

Disbandment of all armed forces (land, naval and air) and the
prohibition of their re-establishment in any form;

Destruction of arms and ammunition of all types, both in the
armed forces and in stockpiles;

Scrapping of all warships, military aircraft and all other types
of war materiel;

Complete prohibition of atomic and hydrogen weapons dis-
continuance of the production of all types of these weapons, their
elimination from the armaments of the states, and destruction 'of
stockpiles of same;

Complete discontinuance of the production of rocket weapons
of all types and ranges, including space rockets for military purposes,
and their destruction;

Prohibition of the production, possession and storage of chemical
and bacteriological weapons, and destruction of stockpiles of these
weapons;

Dismantling of all types of military bases on foreign territory
land, naval and air, and of all rocket-launching installations;

Abolition of military production at war plants and of war pro-
duction facilities in general industry;

Discontinuance of all military training and musters, both in
armies and in public organizations, and the enactment of law abolish-
ing military service in any form compulsory, voluntary, through
recruitment, etc.;

Abolition of war ministries, general staffs, military training
institutions, and of military and para-military establishments and
organizations of all kinds;

Discontinuance of allocation of funds for military purposes in
any form, both out of the state budget and by public organizations
and private persons;

Prohibition by law of war propaganda and military indoctrina-
tion of the youth, and the enactment of laws providing for the strict-
est punishment for violation of any of the above measures.

The states should retain only strictly limited contingents, agreed
for every country, of police (militia), equipped with small arms and
designed solely to maintain internal order and protect the personal
security of citizens.

To supervise the punctual implementation of the measures of
general and complete disarmament there shall be established an
international control body comprised of all states. The personnel of
the control body shall be recruited on an international basis with
due regard to the principle of equitable geographical distribution.

The international control body shall have at its disposal all
facilities necessary to exercise strict control The functions and powers
of that body shall correspond to the nature of the disarmament
measures being carried out.

The Soviet Government proposes that the program of general
and complete disarmament be carried out as soon as possible
within a period of four years.

In the first stage it is proposed to carry out the following
measures:

Reduction, under appropriate control, of the strength of the
armed forces of the USSR, the USA and CPR (the People's Republic
of China) to the level of 1,700,000, and of those of the United King-
dom and France to 650,000 each.

Reduction of the strength of the armed forces of other states to
levels to be agreed at a special session of the United Nations General
Assembly or at a World Conference on General and Complete
Disarmament.

Reduction of the armaments and war materiel at the disposal
of the armed forces of states by such proportions that the remaining
quantity of armaments corresponds to the determined level of armed
forces.

In the second stage it is proposed to carry out:

Completion of the abolition of the armed forces retained by the
states.

Dismantling of all military bases on foreign territory. Troops
and military personnel shall be withdrawn from foreign territory to
within their own national frontiers and disbanded.

In the third stage:

All types of nuclear and rocket weapons shall be destroyed

The materiel of the air force shall be liquidated

Prohibition of the production, possession and storing of chemical
and bacteriological weapons shall come into force. All stocks of
chemical and bacteriological weapons in the possession of states shall
be removed and destroyed under international control.

Scientific research for war purposes and the development of
weapons and war materiel shall be prohibited

War ministries, general staffs, all military and para-military
establishments and organizations shall be abolished.

All military training and musters shall be terminated. States
shall prohibit by law military training of the youth.

In accordance with their respective constitutional procedures
states shall enact laws abolishing military service in any form
compulsory, voluntary, through recruiting, etc. and prohibiting the
re-establishment in overt or covert form of any military or para-
military establishments or organizations.

Allocation of funds for military purposes in any form, both out
of state budgets and by public organizations, shall be discontinued.
The funds released by the implementation of general and complete
disarmament shall be used to reduce or entirely abolish taxes on the
population, to subsidize the national economies and to render exten-
sive economic and technical assistance to underdeveloped countries.

To control the implementation of the measures of general and
complete disarmament, an international control body is to be set up.
The scope of control and inspection shall correspond to the stage of
the phased disarmament

After the consummation of general and complete disarmament,
which must include the abolition of all types of armed forces and
the destruction of all types of weapons, including weapons of mass
destruction (nuclear, rocket, chemical, bacteriological), the interna-
tional control body shall have free access to everything subject to
control.

The control organization may set up a system of aerial observa-
tion and aerial photography over the territories of states.

During the implementation of the program of general and com-
plete disarmament, up to the time of disbandment of all armed
forces, the states shall maintain between the various services of their
armed forces the ratio which existed between them at the time the
disarmament treaty entered into force.

The program of general and complete disarmament shall be
carried out by the states in strict conformity with the time limits
specified in the treaty, and its implementation cannot be suspended
or made dependent on the fulfillment of any conditions not provided
for by the treaty.

Against the event of any state attempting to circumvent or violate
the treaty on general and complete disarmament, the treaty should

100

include a provision to the effect that any violation of it shall be
subject to immediate consideration by the Security Council and the
General Assembly of the United Nations in accordance with their
powers.

It goes without saying that the Soviet Government wishes to
view the existing situation realistically, and if for any reason the
Western Powers do not evince a readiness at present to embark on
general and complete disarmament, the Soviet Government is pre-
pared, as before, to reach agreement with other states on appropriate
partial measures for disarmament and the strengthening of security.
The chief of these, in the opinion of the Soviet Government, are:

1) Creation of a control and inspection zone with a reduction
of foreign troops on the territory of the West European countries
concerned;

2) Creation of an atom-free zone in Central Europe;

3) Withdrawal of all foreign troops from the territory of Euro-
pean states and dismantling of military bases on foreign territory;

4) Conclusion of a nonaggression pact between the member-
states of NATO and of the Warsaw Treaty;

5) An agreement on the prevention of surprise attack by one
state on another.

The Soviet Government thinks it appropriate to recall its dis-
armament proposals of May 10, 1955, containing concrete ideas
concerning partial disarmament measures. It is convinced that these
proposals constitute a good basis for agreement on this vitally impor-
tant problem.

As to the question of the cessation of nuclear weapons tests, the
Soviet Government stands, now as before, for immediate termination
of these tests for all time.

The Soviet Government expresses its deep conviction that the
proposed radical solution of the disarmament problem would ensure
a fundamental change in the development of international relations,
establish an atmosphere of confidence between the states and create
the conditions for a peaceful life for the peoples. The Soviet Govern-
ment calls upon the governments of all countries of the world, and
particularly the Governments of the Great Powers which have the
most powerful armed forces, which are permanent members of the
Security Council, and which bear a special responsibility to the peo-
ples for world security to proceed jointly and without delay to the
implementation of general and complete disarmament.

101

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S STATEMENT BEFORE HIS
DEPARTURE FROM NEW YORK

N. S. Khrushchev and his party left New York on September 19
for Los Angeles.

Before his departure N. S. Khrushchev made the following
statement:

Ladies and gentlemen, we visited New York and spent two days
here at the kind invitation of the Mayor, Mr. Wagner. And although
that is a short period, we were very pleased to have a glimpse, if
only cursory, of your 1 city, to. meet its residents, its civic leaders and
businessmen. It may be said that in a way I am also a representative
of my country's business world, because under our socialist system
the Government of the Soviet Union directs not only the political,
but also the economic life of the state.

I have become convinced that the absolute majority of officials
and businessmen in your city, and particularly the ordinary working
people, treated us representatives of a different, socialist world
with great regard.

I was a miner in the past and feel best of all, like a fish in water,
when I am among working people. Regrettably, in your city I have
had no opportunity of coming into contact with the ordinary people
the workers, who are the backbone of the life of the city, the
producers of its wealth. It was not because the city authorities
wanted to prevent such contact. They explained that they feared
provocative acts by a handful of hooligans who might have taken
advantage of such contact to stage a provocation, although these
elements are, of course, only a drop in the ocean among the friendly
population of New York. The people of New York came out into
the streets in large numbers and gave us a friendly welcome. We
appreciate it, and are grateful to them.

Our visit to your country and the return visit to the Soviet
Union by President Eisenhower will evidently mark the beginning
of an improvement and expansion of relations between our countries.
We are indebted to the President for his kind invitation and will, in
turn, do everything to receive him appropriately in our country.

I should like to thank the Secretary General of the United
Nations Organization, Mr. Hammarskjold, who invited me to address
the General Assembly and gave a dinner last night at which I met
representatives of many member-countries of the United Nations.

102

I also thank the delegates at the UN General Assembly for the
attention with which they listened to my address at the meeting. In
that address I made very important disarmament proposals on behalf
of the Soviet Government If these proposals are supported by the
governments of other countries, it will mark the start of a new era
in international relations and lay the foundation for enduring friend-
ship and cooperation among nations.

I assure you that the Soviet Government and I will do all in
our power to strengthen peace and friendship among nations.

As I leave your great city, I should like to convey greetings and
best wishes for happiness and prosperity to the people of New York

Good-bye, ladies and gentlemen!

103

IN LOS ANGELES September 19

N. S. Khrushchev and his parly arrived in Los Angeles on Septem-
ber 19 at 12:09 P.M., local time.

SPEECH OF N. S. KHRUSHCHEV AT LUNCHEON
HELD AT THE TWENTIETH CENTURY-FOX STUDIOS

On September 19 Eric Johnston, President of the Motion Picture
Association of America, and Spyros P. Skouras, owner of the Twentieth
Century-Fox Studios, gave a luncheon in honor of N. S. Khrushchev.

Spyros P. Skouras, the owner of Twentieth Century-Fox Studios,
made a speech in which he warmly greeted N. S. Khrushchev on his
arrival in Hollywood. He also expressed his opinion on a number of
questions concerning the film exchange between the USA and the USSR.
Skouras used the opportunity to return again to the topic already used
time and again by American speakers concerning the "merits" of the
capitalist way of life.

N. S. Khrushchev spoke in reply:
MR. JOHNSTON, MRS. JOHNSTON:

I am also addressing you, my dear brother Greek! (N. S. Khrush-
chev turned at this point to Spyros P. Skouras, President of the
Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation, who spoke before him.)
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, Russians have from times of old called
the Greeks brothers, because the Russians took part in the war
against the Turks to liberate Greece. You should also know that
back in ancient times the Russians adopted the religious, Christian
rites of the Greeks. So you and we are also in a way brothers in
Christ (Animation, applause.) You might say to me that Fm an
atheist But then I am speaking not only for myself, but also on
behalf of our entire people, among whom there are both atheists and
believers Christians, Moslems and people of other religions.

Americans always begin their speeches by saying **Ladies and
Gentlemen." Allow me, too, to begin that way.

Ladies and Gentlemen (applause) f

I thank Mr. Johnston for the invitation to this meeting.

I am very glad to meet the flower of the U.S. stage and screen
world represented in this hall. I think the comrades who have come
with me to the United States and are accompanying me share my joy.

104

I must say that I had planned to speak along somewhat different
lines, but Mr. Spyros Skouras here has led me off my tack. (Laughter,
applause.) I hadn't meant my speech to follow the direction which
Mr. Skouras laid down in his speech, for some people might have
suspected me of having come here to make propaganda for our way
of life and of wanting to win over all of you fine Americans to our
side. By the way, I should like that Anyone wishing to come to our
country is welcome, we'll treat him to Russian pies. (Laughter, ap-
plause.) But since you've brought up the subject of how ordinary
people work their way up, allow me to answer you.

Mr. Skouras said he had risen from the ranks. What were you
in Greece? (Skouras says that he began working for hire at the age
of 12.)

That naturally produces an impression, and I wish to express
my respect for you. But I'm not amazed. Would you like to know
what I was? I began working when I learned to walk. Till the age
of 15 I tended calves, then sheep, and then the landlord's cows. I did
all that before I was 15. Then I worked at a factory owned by Ger-
mans and later in coal pits owned by Frenchmen. I worked at
Belgian-owned chemical plants, and now I am Prime Minister of the
great Soviet state. (Stormy applause, Fofce: "We knew that! 9 )

KHRUSHCHEV: What if you did? I'm not ashamed of my past
All honest labor, whatever its nature, is worthy of respect (Applause.)
Work, as such, cannot be dirty. If s only the conscience that can be.
(Applause.) All honest labor is worthy of respect

SKOURAS: How many Prime Ministers are there in Russia?

KHRUSHCHEV: And how many Presidents do you have? (Laugh-
ter, applause.) Anyway, I'll answer you. We have the Government of
the Soviet Union and I have been made Chairman of the Council
of Ministers. We also have 15 Union Republics and each republic
has its government. In other words, there are 15 Prime Ministers.
Besides, we have Prime Ministers of the Autonomous RepubBcs.
How many do you have? (Laughter, applause.)

SKOURAS: We have two million presidents of companies. (Laugh-
ter.)

KHRUSHCHEV:We have Comrade Tikhonov here with us. Please
rise. Is anyone here in America richer than this man? What is he?
He was a worker, then became a metallurgical engineer. And now
he is Chairman of the Dnepropetrovsk Economic Council He is in
charge of huge iron-and-steel worts. He is in charge of huge chemical
works. The Dnepropetrovsk Economic Council supplies more than

105

JV. S. Khrushchev chats with Mr. Erie Johnston, President of
the National Motion Picture Association, during a luncheon given
by the Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation in Hollywood.

half the iron ore mined in the Soviet Union. Isn't that enough, Mr.
Skouras? (Laughter.)

SKOURAS: That's a monopoly!

KHRUSHCHEV: Yes, it is a monopoly, but a monopoly of the
people! Comrade Tikhonov has no capital of his own. All that he
manages belongs to the people. (Applause.) So it's no use arguing
about who has greater opportunities, you or we, because you can't
beat us there.

We have Professor Yemelyanov here with us. He is an atomic
scientist of ours. What was he? An ex-worker, he graduated from an
institute and became a metallurgical engineer. Now he is an eminent
scientist in the field of atomic energy. There you have two of our
presidents, and we have millions of presidents just like them.

As you see, gentlemen, you had better put aside the question
of ordinary people working their way up. That's the best thing you
can do. (Animation, applause.) I might quote the Russian saying in
this regard It says, "You cannot catch old sparrows with chaff."
(Laughter.)

America is a fine country and its great people are a worthy
people. Time was when America was admired by all peoples of the

106

world. It has taught everyone a lesson in industrial development. It
is the home of assembly-line production, which is the most progressive
and efficient industrial process. After the Revolution we set out to
learn from the Americans. We sent our engineers to you for training.
They studied in your colleges and universities and were employed as
ordinary workers at Ford's and alsewhere. The man in charge of our
automobile industry today is Engineer Strokin, a Minister of the
Soviet Government. He is one of our best automobile engineers. He
used to work for Ford, and Ford thought highly of him; he suggested
that Strokin stay and work for him. If Grandfather Ford were alive,
he could have told you what his pupil is worth.

Colonel Cooper, an American engineer, was awarded the Order
of the Red Banner of Labor for services as consultant for the Dnieper
Hydropower Project Hundreds of American engineers worked in our
industries at the time of the First Five-Year Plan. We thank you for
it and bow low before you for your help. (Applause.) You may be
proud of our successes, just as a good teacher, or professor, is proud
when his effort is rewarded by his pupil being worthy of his preceptor.
We learned from you, and you need not be ashamed of your pupils,
you should be proud of them, because now we want to catch up with
you. (Animation, applause.) It follows that our people are bright
pupils, not dunces. (Laughter, applause.) In the First Five- Year Plan
years, when you helped us build our first tractor plant, it took us two
years to get it going properly, because we had no experience. When
Ford helped us build the Gorky Automobile Plant, we ruined quite a
few machines before learning to make automobiles. But now we,
your ex-pupils, have sent a rocket into outer space and a Soviet
pennant has now reached the moon. (Stormy applause.) Not bad
pupils, are we? (Animation, applause.) Yet there are still some peo-
ple in your country who keep harping that people in the Soviet Union
are little short of slaves. But what sort of slave system is that? How
could a slave system have assured such unprecedented progress in
science and art as we have made in our country?

The reason why Roman civilization, as well as Greek civiliza-
tion, declined, esteemed Mr. Skouras, was that it was a civilization
built on slave labor, which shackled man's energy, will and freedom.
Science and the arts can attain full bloom only if there is the fullest
freedom of the individual and of society. (Applause.)

You and we have different ideas on this matter. You say that
profit, or business as you call it, is the prime mover of people's
energy, of their intellect and initiative. We say a different thing:

107

The prime mover is man's conscience, his awareness of the fact that
he is free and working for himself, for his kin, for the society in
which he lives, that the means of production belong to society and
not to some individual who grows rich by exploiting other people's
labor.

You are against our concept and we are against yours. Well,
whaf s to be done about it? Carry on under capitalism, with your
corporations and whatever else you have. Don't seek salvation for
"God's lost sheep" the Soviet people, who have chosen the path of
socialist development You'll only gain by it if we come a cropper
and return to the fold of capitalism. Why should you worry if you
think we are on the wrong path? (Laughter.) You have done your
civic duty. You have told us that we are following a path which you
think leads us to a pitfalL That will do, thank you for warning us.
But I say to you that I see no pitfall ahead but a clear vista, the
future happiness of mankind. Some of you may believe that I don't
understand certain simple things. That is their affair, of course. But
I, too, am entitled to tell such people that they have not yet risen
to an understanding of the new that is communist construction.

Where are we to seek a way out of the present situation? Shall
we settle the matter in a free-for-all? That, indeed, is how disputes
were settled in the past But formerly things were much simpler;
people would come to grips and tear out handfuls of each other's
hair, beard and whiskers, and then new beards and new whiskers
would grow in their place. But now you know that if a new rough-
and-tumble ensued, there would be nothing left to grow; as we say
in Russia, "It's too late to cry over lost hair after your head is cut
off." (Laughter, applause.)

That is why, ladies and gentlemen, we say: Let us live in peace
(Stormy applause.) Let time judge who is right and who is wrong.
Time is the best judge. This is our attitude. I have come to you so
that we may achieve a better understanding of each other, so that
you may get a better idea of what our people are like I am not a
delegate sent to conduct diplomatic negotiations, I am the guest of
your President, the guest of your great country. And that is why I
want to discuss things in a way that will enable us to find reasonable
solutions and settle controversial issues with the object of banishing
war and establishing peace and friendship between the peoples of
our countries and between all peoples. (Stormy applause.)

I think that the argument with my brother Greek on this matter
is over and that each retains his own opinion. I respect your opinion,

108

so you, too, leave mine alone. (Animation.) Carry on under capital-
ism, "and God help you," as the saying goes. (Laughter, applause.)
And we, for our part, will carry on under socialism and build
communism. At the moment you are ahead of us in the economic
field, we still have to put in a great deal of work and sweat to
catch up with you. Very good, we will put our backs to it but we
will catch and pass you, and forge ahead I am convinced of that
You may laugh at it for the moment, but you'd do better to wait
till we pass you and say, "Good-bye, Messrs. Capitalists, our train is
moving on." (Animation.) By the way, a group of U.S. economists
who studied our country's potentialities in the competition with your
country have estimated that in production the Soviet Union will
overtake the United States by 1970. I repeat, it isn't I who say so
but American economists. If you like, I will let you read their report
That is, if you haven't read it yet I must say that nowadays I read
less fiction and fewer political books, because I have to read mostly
statements made by U.S. Senators, economists and journalists.
(Laughter.)

Ladies and gentlemen, I had not meant to make a political
speech here. It was Mr. Skouras who introduced class complications
from the outset (Laughter.) I did not want that, I wanted to say
nice things to you. I wanted to tell you we were very happy to meet
you. In the Soviet Union, you know, we have the deepest respect and
affection for intellectuals. And you are not only intellectuals, but
toilers of the most refined, I might say the most delicate, of arts-
subtle artistry. That being so, you require gentle treatment, loving
care and warmth, like orchids, which need the right humidity, light
and warmth. In our country, we cannot think of making any progress
without producing an intelligentsia of our own, without developing
our culture in every way. There would be no point in building a
new society without that

I recall certain incidents of our Civil War, my meetings and
conversations with intellectuals of the former, czarist Russia. I was
in the Red Army when we beat the White Guards and drove them
into the Black Sea. My unit was stationed in the Kuban region, and
I was quartered in the house of an educated family. The landlady
was a graduate of the St Petersburg Institute for young ladies of
gentle birth. As for me, I suppose I still smelled of coal when I was
living in her house. There were other educated people in that house
a lawyer, engineer, teacher and musician, We Red Army men
mixed with them. When they met me, a Communist, they saw that,

109

far from eating human flesh, I was starving, to put it plainly. Some-
times I even had no bread, but I never tried to take any away from
them or, indeed, ask for anything. They came to respect me. The
mistress of the house saw that we Bolsheviks were not at all the
sort of people our enemies made us out to be. Members of the old
intelligentsia convinced themselves more and more that Communists
were honest people who sought no personal gain and dedicated them-
selves to the common weal We were still unpolished, uneducated
workers at that time, but we wanted to receive an education, to learn
to govern the state, to build a new society, and we devoted all our
energy to it. I remember the landlady asking me: "Tell me, what do
you know about ballet? You're a simple miner, aren't" you?" To tell
the truth, I didn't really know anything about ballet at that time,
because I hadn't seen any ballet then and, moreover, had never
seen a ballerina. (Laughter.) I had no idea what it was all about,
so to speak. (Laughter.) But I said to her, "Just wait, we're going
to have everything, ballet too." Frankly speaking, if I had been asked
at that time just what we were going to have, I might not quite have
known what to say, but I was certain that there was a better life
ahead It was Lenin's Party that had instilled this certainty in our
hearts.

And now I wish to ask you what country has the most highly
developed ballet Would it be your country? No. Why, you don't
even have a state opera and ballet theater. Your theaters subsist
solely on the hand-outs of wealthy people. But in our country it is
the state that appropriates funds for the development of art The
whole world recognizes that Soviet ballet is the most extensively
developed. We are proud of it When our ballet company toured the
United States, you rewarded it with well-deserved applause and
praise. And what about our dramatic theater, what about our stage-
craft? I won't brag but will merely ask you to consult your conscience
and tell me whether our theater is on the decline or on the rise.
And what about our movies? You and we have different tastes. But
it is a fact, isn't it, that our films win prizes at international festivals.
They are awarded to our films by impartial people who know their
business. One of the prizes at a recent world festival went to the
screen version of The Fate of a Man, a story by M. A. Sholokhov,
the outstanding writer, who is here with us. The film is a masterpiece.
We also give our intelligentsia substantial material support At
any rate, they don't have to go to the doctor to be treated for under-
nourishment; in fact, they often seek medical advice against excessive

110

weight. (Laughter.) That isn't a bad indication. Professor Markov
here, who is a prominent doctor, will bear me out (Applause.)

Our art workers receive not only the remuneration that they
earn. The best of them are also decorated or awarded Lenin Prizes,
That is a token of the deep respect in which they are held by our
people and government. Come and see our country, and speak to
our art workers! And what about literature? We are proud of It
Meet Mikhail Alexandrovich Sholokhov, a Don Cossack He has
brought fante to our country by writing And Quiet Flows the Don,
Virgin Soil Upturned and other excellent works.

Now I will answer a question put by my Greek friend. By the
way, Mr. Skouras, I hope you are not offended that I take this liberty
in speaking to you? It is just to show my good feelings for you. If
you are oifended in any way, I'm willing to apologize and to take
no more liberties.

SKOURAS: I am honored to have the Premier of a great nation
argue with me

KHRUSHCHEV: I am not arguing, I am simply discussing matters
with you. I am the guest and cannot argue with my host (Laughter,
applause.) Besides, it was you who started the argument, if that is
what you call it. (Laughter, applause.) You referred here to the aid
extended to Soviet people after the Civil War, during the terrible
famine of 1921-1922, when ARA, the American Relief Administra-
tion, was set up to aid the starving population. The committee was
headed by Herbert Hoover. We remember that well, and we thank
you.

But I feel I must raise a "but" on this score. The "but" is that
our people remember not only the fact that America helped us
through ARA and that as a result thousands of people were saved
from starvation in the Volga Region. They also remember that in
the hard time after the October Revolution, U.S. troops led by their
generals landed on Soviet soil to help the White Guards fight our
Soviet system. And they were not the only ones to land. The Japa-
nese landed too, the French landed in Odessa and the Germans
advanced as far as the Soviet Caucasus. The armed forces of bour-
geois Poland seized Kiev. The British, too, landed their forces to
fight us. Many European capitalist countries, as well as the United
States and Japan, sent their troops into an offensive against the
young Soviet state in an effort to strangle our Revolution.

You can imagine what our plight was at that time. We were
mined by the First World War and then by the Civil War. Our

111

mines lay idle and our factories were at a standstill We were starv-
ing, we had nothing to wear and we went barefoot. But what hap-
pened? In spite of all these terrific difficulties, we beat your troops,
pushed all invaders into the sea and defeated the White Guards.

Why do I recall all this? For the simple reason that if you and
your allies had not landed troops at that time, we would have made
short shrift of the White Guards and would have had no Civil War,
no ruin and no famine. And you wouldn't have had to help Soviet
people through ARA, whose work you have just mentioned

But even so, even in these circumstances, we thank the Ameri-
cans for the help they gave us.

Your armed intervention in Russia was the most unpleasant
thing that ever occurred in the relations between our two countries,
for we had never waged war against America until then; our troops
have never set foot on American soil, while your troops have set
foot on Soviet soil You see how it is, ladies and gentlemen. Please
excuse me for these comments. I assure you that I had planned to
make a very short and unemotional speech. But I cannot be silent
when someone treads on my pet corn, even if he does so after putting
a pad on it I cannot put up with it I want to be a worthy partner
who gives a worthy explanation in defense of his country, his people,
Ms state and our ideology.

In conclusion, I want to express once more my heartfelt thanks
for the invitation to visit your country, and to say that my com-
panions and I are pleased with our stay in America. But, on the
other hand, I cannot help voicing my disappointment, voicing some
surprise, at a certain circumstance.

We have always regarded the United States as a strong, well-
organized state whose people have a highly-developed culture. Here
we are now, in your city, where you have the cream of the artistic
world film stars, as you say in your country. Also living here are
industrial workers, ordinary Americans, people of a vast variety of
trades. We should have liked to meet them, to see how they live,
and how they work and rest Now just think of it, I, a Soviet man,
the Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, have come to you as a guesit;
when I was on my way here, an itinerary was drawn up for me and
a program of what I could see here and what places I could visit It
was planned, among other things, that I would visit Disneyland. But
I have just been told that I cannot go to Disneyland (Laughter.)
Why not? I asked Is it by any chance because you now have rocket-
launching pads there? (Laughter.) "No," they tell me, "you can't go

112

there because" just listen to this! "The American authorities can-
not guarantee your safety if you go there,"

What is it? Has cholera or plague broken out there that I might
catch? (Laughter.) Or has Disneyland been seized by bandits who
might destroy me? But your policemen are such strong men, they
could lift a bull by the horns. Surely they could deal effectively with
bandits! Then I said I should like to go to Disneyland just the same
and see how Americans spend their leisure. (Applause.) "Do as you
like," they answered me, "but in that case we cannot guarantee your
safety." What was I to do go and commit suicide? (Laughter.) This
is the situation I, your guest, find myself in! It is more than I can
understand. I won't know how to explain it to my people. Come to
our country if you like, we will go with anyone, you may walk in our
streets and parks, and I guarantee that a foreign guest will hear
nothing from Soviet people but words of respect and welcome. What
am I to say to the organizers of my U.S. tour? I thought you had a
well-organized household. Putting me in a closed car and stewing
me in the sun is not the right way to guarantee my safety. I thought
I could walk freely in your country and meet Americans. But I am
told if s impossible. This development causes me bitter regret and I
cannot but express my disappointment.

You might say, "What a restless guest" But I keep to the
Russian maxim, ''Break bread with me, but speak your mind." And
that should in no way affect our friendly relations.

Please forgive me for speaking somewhat vehemently or heat-
edly. But the temperature here is to blame for it, to some extent.
(Laughter.) Besides, Mr. Skouras had warmed me up to it. (Laugh-
ter, applause.) Please forgive me if I have said anything not quite
pleasing to your ear, if I have let slip anything that has jarred you
a little. The sentiment that guided me in speaking here before you
was one of friendship and respect for you, for your people and for
your President, Mr. Eisenhower,

Thank you for your attention. Thank you, dear friends, thank
you, Mr. Johnston. (Stormy, prolonged applause.)

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV AT RECEPTION

GIVEN BY THE MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES AND

THE ASSOCIATION ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS OF LOS ANGELES

On the evening of September 19 the municipal authorities and the
Association on International Affairs of Los Angeles held a reception in
honor of N. S. Khrushchev.

113

In his introductory speech Norris Poulson, the Mayor of Los An-
geles, allowed himself to repeat the already time-and-again-refuted, dis-
torted version of one of N, S. Khrushchev's speeches and permitted
himself to make tactless attacks against the guest. This behavior of the
mayor aroused surprise and disapproval on the part of many present at
the reception. Later it was condemned in a number of articles in the
American press and in numerous letters and telegrams from ordinary
Americans.

N. S. Khrushchev made a speech at the reception which was re-
ceived with great attention and often interrupted by applause.

MR. MAYOR, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

Allow me to thank you for the hospitality accorded us and for
the invitation to take part in this gathering. We are pleased to meet
representatives of the business world and the intellectuals of the
city of Los Angeles.

We highly appreciate the opportunity we have been given of
acquainting ourselves with the life and achievements of the great
American people. Of course, one must travel a good deal in so vast
and varied a country as the United States of America to form a more
or less correct idea of it But they say that if you want to get a true
idea about the United States you cannot do it without visiting sunny
California. Today, when we had flown here from the Eastern seaboard
of the United States and seen Los Angeles (from our car, of course),
the truth of this opinion was brought home to us.

In the middle of the last century California won fame for its
gold mining, and now you figuratively call it the "Golden State."
But it might be called the "Golden State" even if there had been
no gold dust in its bowels. Fertile land, a warm and mellow climate
and landscapes of unique beauty, combined with enormous outlays
of human labor something which is evident at every turn have
made California a rich land. Orchards, vineyards and cotton fields
border upon one of the country's greatest industrial centers, Los
Angeles. As one sees your city, one is seized by a feeling of respect
for the enterprise and indomitable will shown by the American
pioneer settlers and their descendants in combating the forces of
nature.

You people of California, the development of which began much
later than that of other U.S. areas, should probably understand the
enthusiasm of Soviet people who are now building new big cities,
the world's largest hydropower stations and industrial plants in the
erstwhile wildernesses of Siberia and Kazakhstan, settling and culti-
vating what were almost uninhabited tracts of land To enable you
to judge the scale of that effort, I can tell you that in the expanses

114

of Siberia and Kazakhstan the Soviet people have in recent years
developed virgin land whose total area is more than double the entire
agricultural area of California. To be sure, there is some difference
in the natural conditions of our two countries. Your pioneers had to
develop the new lands of California in a scorching sun. Soviet people,
on the other hand, are developing the riches of Kazakhstan and
Siberia in a bracing cold of forty degrees below zero Centigrade
Anybody who finds it hot here may come to our country. He can
cool himself there.

I should like to deal briefly at this meeting with the aims of
our U.S. visit We gratefully accepted the U.S. President's invitation
to visit your country, to acquaint ourselves with the life of your
people and to discuss with the President a number of questions that
are of interest to both our countries.

There is one question which is equally important to the Soviet
and American peoples and to all other peoples the question of
ensuring peace. Everybody realizes that the welfare and prosperity
of nations and states depend on the course which international rela-
tions will take in the next few years whether it will be toward
strengthening peace or whether the war danger will go on increasing.
What is it that today prevents states from joining their efforts
and bending them to ease international tension? First of all,- it is
the atmosphere of the cold war, which weighs heavily on relations
between countries, in particular, those between the USSR and the
USA.

One can at least understand it when strained relations between
countries are due to real antagonisms, such as, for example, terri-
torial disputes or economic claims. But it is a feature of the cold
war that it involves countries which have no direct antagonisms of
that kind.

I have been told that in Los Angeles one can observe an
atmospheric phenomenon known as "smog," which occurs when in
bad weather smoke and soot get mixed with fog, with the result
that breathing becomes difficult. It seems to me that smog is in
many respects like the cold war.

The cold war is called "cold 79 because so far it has produced
no flames, fortunately enough. But it is accumulating a great deal of
inflammable material that may flare up from any chance spark Hie
cold war produces more than enough soot. To normalize cooperation
between states, it is indispensable by joint effort to put an end to
the cold war and get rid of the prejudices, dislikes and mutual dis-

115

trust engendered by it The sooner we end the cold war, the better
it will be for our peoples and for all mankind

I should like to believe that the exchange of visits between
President Eisenhower and myself will contribute toward the cold
war fading into the past for good, with a warmer climate setting in
in the relations between countries, a climate similar to that of Cali-
fornia or to the no-less-blessed climate of the South Coast of the
Crimea, where I recently spent my vacation.

As everyone knows, the cold war has given rise to quite a
number of international problems that are now awaiting solution.

The most important and pressing problem is that of disarma-
ment Weighing the negative consequences of the arms race, one does
not primarily think so much of the human labor, knowledge and
ingenuity spent to no sensible purpose, nor of the heavy economic
burden it imposes even on the mightiest powers, as of the danger of
a military explosion that inevitably attends the arms race.

There are now many people who realize the extremely grave
danger arising from the arms race. Indeed, it is an open secret that
modern means of annihilation have been stockpiled in such quantities
that they can cause terrible destruction and take an enormous toll
of human lives.

Until the recent past long distances and oceans served as natural
barriers to military conflicts expanding and crossing from continent
to continent Both the First and the Second World Wars chiefly
devastated Europe and some regions of Asia and Africa. Today the
situation is different The distances between the remotest points on
the globe are now measured in tens of minutes, and the most devas-
tating means of extermination nuclear weapons can be carried
to any area of the globe.

We in the Soviet Union often wonder why, despite our desire
to reach agreement on disarmament with the Western Powers, we
are being forced to take part in the arms race. Perhaps the object
of the arms race is to achieve military superiority over the Soviet
Union. But whatever you may say, experience shows that the arms
race cuts both ways.

The arms race is not benefiting either the Soviet or the American
people; and no matter how you look at it, it is becoming more and
more absurd and dangerous. The armaments curve has crept so far
upward that today the need for an earnest and honest understanding
on disarmament is greater than ever.

116

Those present here probably know that at yesterday's UN
General Assembly meeting, the Soviet Government put forward
cardinal proposals on disarmament The gist of these proposals is
that they call for the general and complete disarmament of states
within the shortest possible time roughly four years for the de-
struction of all types of armament, nuclear weapons and missiles
among them, the disbandment of all armed forces and the abolition
of war ministries and general staffs. The states would keep only
small, agreed-upon police (militia) forces intended for the mainte-
nance of internal order and public safety, and equipped only with
small arms.

To appreciate hi full measure the significance of our new pro-
posals, one should also bear in mind that these proposals remove one
of the main difficulties that arose in all the previous disarmament
talks, namely, the problem of control, for, given complete disarma-
ment, the states will have nothing to conceal from each other and
control can accordingly be complete and comprehensive. It will be
control and not military reconnaissance because, in the absence of
armies, reconnaissance becomes pointless.

By making these proposals, we want to solve the disarmament
problem completely and for all time, to put the states in conditions
in which they will have no material means of waging war. Indeed,
it is hard to imagine that having neither aircraft, tanks, rockets nor
any other modern weapons, the Americans and Russians would fight
each other with, say, forks or table knives. We have invariable faith
in the good aspirations of man and think that human beings are not
born to kill each other, but to live in peace and friendship. You know
that the prime commandment of the Christian religion is, "Thou
shalt not kill"

We know, of course, that the idea of disarmament has many
opponents and that our new proposals will not be to everybody's
liking. But we should like to believe that these proposals, made in
good faith and representing the utmost of what a Great Power can
bring itself to do, especially in the present state of international
tension, will bring a favorable response from the United States. We
should also like to hope that as a result of our talks with President
Eisenhower, the Soviet and U.a Governments will gain a better
understanding of each other's attitude to the disarmament question
and will subsequently join their efforts in solving this most formidable
and most vital problem of our time And surely, if our two countries
find a common language and arrive at a common opinion on ques-

117

tions of disarmament, it will be safe to say that the greater part of
the difficulties are over and done with.

Our peoples fought shoulder to shoulder against the common
enemy in the grim days of the Second World War. And since our
peoples were together in the most crucial periods of history, what
surer indication can there be that fundamental and lasting interests
draw the two countries to cooperation and friendship?

In this connection, I recall what President Eisenhower said in
Geneva in 1955. "The American people," he said, "would like to be
friends with the Soviet peoples. There are no natural differences
between our peoples or our nations. There are no territorial con-
flicts or commercial rivalries. Historically, our two countries have
always been at peace."

The peoples of the USSR and the USA have much in common.
Hie meetings I have had convince me that the American people
value and love peace. I have discovered many other traits that bring
our two peoples closer together. They are industry, the quest for the
new, the urge for knowledge and technological progress and, lastly,
such good human traits as frankness, a sense of humor, good will
and love of country.

We are happy, of course, that of late a fresh note has come
into Soviet-American relations. Mutual visits and meetings of Soviet
and American statesmen, livelier cultural, scientific and technological
contacts, exchanges in the fields of agriculture, education, public
health and exhibitions, and expanding travel are all shoots of the
new element in Soviet-American relations. Los Angeles is the heart
of the American cinema. The cinema is the most popular of arts and
exerts a tremendous influence on the life of society. If it takes the
right direction, it can serve as an important medium for promoting
peace and friendship among peoples, for spreading humane ideas and
good will. But if it takes the wrong direction, it will become a medium
for whipping up hatred and may seriously prejudice the cause of
friendship, peace and progress. What ends this powerful art will
serve depends on the film workers. We attach great importance to
the development of the cinema in our country, to the making of films
that educate people in the lofty ideals of international friendship,
humanism, peace and progress.

Los Angeles faces East The Pacific washes both the Los
Angeles waterfront and that of the Soviet city of Vladivostok. In
meeting representatives of your city, I should like to re-emphasize

118

the Soviet Union's readiness to develop all-round contacts and estab-
lish friendly cooperation with the United States of America

Strictly speaking, I had expected to conclude my speech with
this. But the speakers who preceded me raised some points which I
cannot leave unanswered. (Laughter, applause.)

I turn to you, Mr. Mayor, my host. You said in your speech
that we wanted to bury you. You are treating my companions and
myself to an excellent meal and we thank you for it, but I will speak
my mind just the same. Is that the custom in your country?
(Applause.)

I want to ask you why you must take up again what I dealt
with in earlier speeches following my arrival in America. I suppose
mayors, too, read the press. (Laughter, applause.) In any case, the
chairmen of city Soviets in our country read the newspapers unfail-
ingly. If they did not read the press, they might not be elected for
another term, (Laughter, applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, some people don't seem to want to get
off the hobby-horse of the cold war and the arms race. If they refuse
to get off it and hang on to the saddle, where will it take them and
what will they get? If such people want the arms race and war, let
them stay on their horse. Then everybody will see clearly that there
can be no question of disarmament On the contrary, the arms race
will gain in intensity. If you are unwilling to accept disarmament
and want to continue the arms race, we will have no choice but to
go on making rockets, which in our country are being turned out by
the assembly-line method.

Gentlemen, think well what that may lead to. You know that
I have come here with good intentions, but it appears that some of
you would like to reduce the matter to a joke. I repeat that it is
a question of extremely serious things the question of peace or war,
the life or death of people. We offer you a hand of friendship. If you
don't want it, say so.

(Foice: "We want it!")

KHRUSHCHEV: In that case we must show a sensible approach
to the question under discussion. We mustn't play with words. We
hold much too important posts, and playing with words may have
most deplorable consequences for our peoples. (Prolonged applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, since your Mayor doesn't seem to have
read what I said in Washington, I should like to make it clear once
more what I said there.

119

I have already said that the words "We will bury capitalism*
should not be taken literally, as is done by ordinary gravediggers
who carry a spade and dig graves and bury the dead. What I had
in mind was the outlook for the development of human society.
Socialism will inevitably succeed capitalism. According to our doc-
trine, it will be so and according to yours, it won't History will decide
which is right and which is wrong. I say it again I've almost worn
my tongue thin repeating it you may live under capitalism and we
will live under socialism and build communism. The one whose
system proves better will win. We will not bury you, nor will you
bury us. Carry on to your hearts* content, and God be with you.
(Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, it was not to have a cup of tea or, say,
a glass of brandy that your President invited me to this country.
I have companions with whom I could do that back home if I felt like
it, without having to fly thousands of kilometers. The President, too,
could do it at his home, and without me. It is clear to me, of course,
that the U.S. President will not accept the communist point of view
with regard to the development of human society, and I think the
President, too, doesn't expect to convert me to capitalism. (Anima-
tion.)

Why has President Eisenhower invited me to the United States?
It was wisdom that evidently prompted him to do so in order to
find contact with the Soviet Union and reach an understanding to
live in peace. We know that you don't like Communists. But we are
neighbors. The Pacific separates us, but it also connects our coun-
tries. The question today is whether there is to be peace between our
countries or whether there is to be war. I want to tell you frankly that
I am deeply concerned about the persistence, the deliberate misrep-
resentation of the ideas expressed by me on the part of some of your
spokesmen, who seek to maintain the state of cold war.

Make your choice: Shall we advance together to peace, or shall
we continue the cold war and the arms race? I have not come to
plead with you. We are no less strong than you. I have already made
many speeches in the United States but have not once resorted to
the word "arms," to say nothing of "missiles." And if I have spoken
about it today, you must understand that I had no choice.

Perhaps some people would like to create the impression that we
have come here as poor relations and beg you for peace as for alms.
But don't fall into error. All peoples want peace. If armaments yield
profits to your monopolies, if it is suggested that we should compete

120

in arms production and not in peaceful pursuits, then it is a terrible
course to steer! Think where that will get us, and make your choice.
The point is this: Either our meeting with President Eisenhower will
result in the relaxation of tension, in the termination of the cold war,
or we will part without achieving the results desired

This visit by the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the
Soviet Union is the first visit made to the United States by a head
of our state in the history of our countries. Nevertheless, we* lived.
If you do not accept our idea of working for peace, for the promo-
tion of friendly relations between our countries, perhaps we had
better go home and then let everyone know who really wants peace
and friendship and who obstructs them.

You may well say that you will carry on as you have done so
far. But it should be clear to anyone that it is better to live in peace
and friendship than to live with rockets trained on each other, that
it is better to live in a pure atmosphere in which you can sleep
peacefully, secure in the knowledge that you will have peace today
and tomorrow, that it will be permanent and durable. (Applause.)

When I hear such talk I wonder sometimes whether some peo-
ple have hit on the idea of inviting Khrushchev to the United States
to give him a "rubbing-down," to show him the strength and might
of the United States of America, so that his knees would bend a bit,
so to speak. If that is what those gentlemen expect, they are sorely
mistaken. It won't take us long to fiy home from here. We took about
12 hours to fly here, and I suppose we can make the homeward trip
in about 10 hours. What do you think, Comrade Tupolev?
A. A. TUPOLEV*: Yes, Nikita Sergeyevich, we can.
KHRUSHCHEV: Meet the son of Academician Tupolev, our fa-
mous aircraft designer.

I think we will be more sensible and find a common language.
We should all strive for peace. And now I want to answer Mr. Lodge
about his proposal to exchange books. Today, on our flight here, and
while exchanging opinions, he suggested exchanging books on the
history of our states,

I can say in this connection, let us not hide our identities. You
represent the capitalist world and we, the socialist world. That being
so, not all of our literature suits you, just as not all of your literature
suits us. Let us not beat about the bush.

We are for exchanging cultural values, provided these exchanges
serve to improve our relations, not to worsen them. When dealing

* Eminent Soviet airplane designer.

121

Khrushchev is seen here at the San Luis Obispo sta-
tion on the way from Los Angeles to San Francisco.

122

with a partner, we should adhere to the right principle. If you palm
off some bad goods on him today, he will stop buying them from you.
The rule we stick to is this: You offer us your "merchandise," we
choose and buy what we need. We offer you something in turn, and
you buy what you like. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy
it. (Laughter, applause.)

In the Ukraine we have a popular saying (there are probably
some Ukrainians here, too) : "Your eyes saw what you were buying,
so now eat it even if they pop out** (Laughter.)

However, I agree to Mr. Lodge's proposal But if in writing
your history you advertise your ideology between the lines, you must
bear in mind that Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Uzbeks in
short, all the peoples of the Soviet Union are now educated, they
know what is what and will not read any such books of yours. Our
people will only buy what suits them, and we will sell you what suits
you. We want to be good partners in exchanging cultural merchan-
dise. (Applause.)

This is not an objection to Mr. Lodge. I repeat that I agree to
his proposal I am only saying on what terms such a deal can be
concluded, so that you will not say later that Khrushchev heard
you and agreed, and then refused to accept your merchandise. If
the merchandise is good, we will take it; and if it isn't, we wont
(Animation t applause.)

Thank you for your attention. I wish you every success and
happiness. ( Stormy applause.)

123

IN SAN FRANCISCO September 20-21

N. S. Khrushchev and his party arrived in San Francisco on the
evening of September 20. A welcoming address was delivered at the
railway station by Mayor Christopher. Replying to the greetings, N. S.
Khrushchev said:

MR. MAYOR, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I am very glad to have arrived in your remarkable city of San
Francisco which is so famous. On approaching your city I saw places
resembling the southern parts of our country.

I thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the good and kind wishes and for
the promise of hospitality to me and my party in San Francisco.

As regards the questions which the Mayor mentioned, concern-
ing our ideological views and your attitude toward them, I must say
that I never evaded political arguments, to be exact, talks. If you
wish, I am prepared to participate in controversy. I, of course, will
defend my positions and show the good aspects of our system. You
will have the opportunity of showing your good aspects. Please de-
fend your positions in the discussion and I will defend mine. Talks
and discussions on political subjects, if wisely approached, cannot
spoil our relations or aggravate them; on the contrary, they could
facilitate our rapprochement if every one will be tolerant toward the
other side.

If we are to avoid talks and discussions on political subjects
when we meet with you, then it would be like a meeting of two
dumb people who only mumble instead of talking. This is not natural
for normal people.

I consider that we should adhere to one rule, that these talks
and discussions should not deepen our differences on the basic ques-
tion, that of the necessity of having gpod already not mentioning
friendly relations between us so as to ensure peace between our
countries and between the peoples of all countries.

I express my thanks for the welcome to you, Mr. Mayor, to all
the inhabitants of San Francisco who properly understand my visit
and who correctly consider that I have come here in order to convey
to you greetings from our people, wishes of friendship and coopera-
tion between our countries. (Applause.)

124

MEETING WITH U.S. TRADE-UNION LEADERS

N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the
USSR, met with a group of U.S. trade-union leaders in San Fran-
cisco on September 20. The meeting took place on the initiative of
some leaders of the American Federation of Labor-Congress of
Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO).

The Americans present at the meeting were James B. Carey,
Vice-President of the AFL-CIO (President of the International Union
of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers); Walter P. Reuther,
Vice-President of the AFL-CIO (President of the United Automo-
bile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers); O. A. Knight
(President of the International Union of Oil, Chemical and Atomic
Workers); Karl F. Feller (President of the United Brewery Work-
ers); Emil Rieve (Chairman of the Executive Council of the Textile
Workers Union); Joseph Cuiran (President of the National Mari-
time Union); Paul L. Phillips (President of the United Papermakers
and Paperworkers); George L. P. Weaver, (Union of Electrical Work-
ers) and Victor G. Reuther (United Automobile, Aircraft and Agri-
cultural Implement Workers).

Some questions about the international situation and Soviet-
American relations were brought up during the discussion, which
lasted over three hours and occasionally became sharp.

The U.S. press carried numerous contradictory reports of the
meeting.

The source of information on what happened at the meeting
was a news conference which the U.S. union leaders called late in the
evening, immediately after parting with N. S. Khrushchev. It appears
from the press reports that Walter Reuther, Vice-President of the
AFL-CIO, made extraordinary statements at the news conference,
about the remarks of the head of the Soviet Government, attributing
to him things which he had not said or done. The news confer-
ence, according to the San Francisco Examiner, ended in chaos. Ac-
cording to the same newspaper, two of the union leaders present at
the meeting Rieve, President of the Textile Workers Union, and
Curran, President of the National Maritime Union, told reporters
that a considerable part of Reuther's statements about what had
happened was a lot of nonsense.

On September 22 the New York Times published what it con-
sidered to be a complete transcript of the discussion. That transcript
shows, however, that those who made it reported the discussion

125

arbitrarily. They were apparently afraid to convey to the reader the
actual statements made by the head of the Soviet Government

To set the record straight, the Press Group of the Chairman of the
Council of Ministers of the USSR published the following account
of the discussion in question, the main points of which have been
withheld from the public or distorted in the tendentious accounts
given by some U.S. newspapers:

At the very beginning of the discussion, James Carey and
Walter Reuther said that they and their colleagues were greatly
interested in a frank exchange of views on major international prob-
lems of a pressing character. Carey stressed that they were interested
in the new Soviet proposals for general and complete disarmament
submitted by N. S. Khrushchev to the United Nations. He said that
the American workers were concerned about the fact that enormnnc

Khrushchev greets citizens of San Luis Obispo on the way from Los Angeles to San Fr

sums are being spent on armaments. Reuther, for his part, said that
the most urgent problem was that of how to preserve peace. Carey
and others asked N. S, Khrushchev to tell them about the new Soviet
disarmament proposals. But, in effect, they did not wait to hear the
reply and went on to ask other questions in particular, about eco-
nomic aid to underdeveloped countries.

Answering these questions, N. S. Khrushchev pointed out that
the proposals for general and complete disarmament submitted by
the Soviet Government to the UN, which envisage the allocation of
a certain percentage of the funds saved on arms reduction, could be
instrumental in aiding underdeveloped countries.

"But we aren't waiting till an agreement is reached on disarma-
ment," N. S. Khrushchev said. "We are giving the underdeveloped
countries substantial economic aid right now. On the one hand, we

help them through the UN with funds, medical supplies and food.
On the other hand, we help them on a bilateral basis. In India we
are helping the government to build a steel mill, chemical and ma-
chine-building plants, and pharmaceutical factories. We grant the
Indian Government credits; provide it with blueprints for industrial
plants; send our specialists to help the Indians; and train engineers,
technicians and skilled workers for plants under construction. We also
render large-scale assistance to the Arab countries and countries
in Africa. It is well known that the Soviet Union is extending
friendly assistance to Cambodia, Burma, Ceylon, Yemen, Ethiopia
and other countries.**

Reuther interrupted N. S. Khrushchev and tried to discredit the
Soviet Union's policy of assistance to economically underdeveloped
countries. He went so far as to accuse the Soviet Union of using aid
to underdeveloped countries for selfish purposes, for purposes of
the cold war.

In repulsing that attack, N. S. Khrushchev said: "You are
shooting your shafts in the wrong direction. The Soviet Union has
never exploited anyone, nor is it exploiting anyone now. It helps
underdeveloped countries as a friend, without any political strings
attached For example, we shipped thousands of tons of grain to
Yemen. Yet its system is not socialist. It is a kingdom. Do you call
that aid for selfish purposes? Just what selfish aims do we achieve
thereby? We don't make any profit on that. We act as friends. But
look at what the imperialists are doing. The U.S. monopolies are ex-
ploiting the riches of the underdeveloped countries and making big
profits. Britain, France and other capitalist countries are doing like-
wise. Why cannot those countries expand their help to the under-
developed countries out of the profits they derive in that way? The
Soviet Government has put forward and submitted to the UN a
proposal to that effect The Soviet Union trades with all countries
on a basis of mutual advantage."

Unable to counter N. S. Khrushchev's arguments in any way,
Reuther suddenly shouted: "You are exploiting the people of East
Germany!" This statement drew smiles even from Reuther's col-

N. S. Khrushchev said:

"Where did you see that dream? Calm yourself, you have the
shivers. Who empowered you to speak on behalf of the German
people? Why do you keep trying to speak for other peoples? You
are pampered by the fact that many countries depend on the United

128

States and are compelled to seek your aid. But the socialist countries
stand firmly on their own feet. We don't take off our hats to you.
The Soviet ruble has never bowed, is not bowing now and will never
bow to the dollar."

The disarmament problem came up next. Reuther and some
other trade-union leaders repeated the assertions of the commercial
press to the effect that the Soviet plan for general and complete
disarmament had been put forward merely for propaganda purposes
and that the USSR spent as much on armaments as the USA, that
is, 40 billion dollars a year.

"First of all," N. S. Khrushchev replied, "calculated in your cur-
rency, we spend 25 billion on defense and not 40 billion. In the
second place, your statement that the Soviet proposals are propa-
ganda makes me, a former miner, feel sorry for you. They say you
were born in a working-class environment, but you talk like a spokes-
man for the capitalists. I can understand it when Hearst prints things
like that But when an American trade-union leader repeats them,
I think bitterly of how thoroughly the monopolists have corrupted
you!"

However, Reuther continued to repeat the allegations of reac-
tionary propaganda, which distort the Soviet proposals. Among other
things, he asserted that the Soviet disarmament plan did not envisage
the establishment of control.

"Why is it," N. S. Khrushchev said, "that you know Dulles'
arguments so well and are so ignorant of the Soviet stand? We are
for all-embracing control, but how should it be organized? The United
States proposes setting up control first and talking of disarmament
afterward. At a time when the U.S. has encircled us with its military
bases, control without disarmament can only mean one thing mili-
tary reconnaissance. What we propose, however, is to organize control
by stages, accordingly as disarmament is carried out"

"But we propose organizing an equal measure of control for the
USA and the Soviet Union," Reuther said.

"No, you don't, because those aren't equal terms,'* N. S. Khrush-
chev replied. "U.S. military bases surround our frontiers, while we
have no bases on the American continent. How would you feel if
there were Soviet military bases in Mexico and Canada?**

"Who is keeping you from having them?" said Victor Reuther,
brother of the Vice-President of the AFL-CIO. "Set them up."

(This observation, provocative in effect, brought indignant pro-
tests from the entire assembly.)

129

"How can you, a spokesman for the working class, bring yourself
to talk like that!" N. S. Khrushchev said to Victor Reuther.

Walter Reuther made a clumsy attempt to change the subject,
saying that it was late and that the Prime Minister was "tired."

N. S. Khrushchev said that it was impossible to discuss things
by jumping from one question to another like fleas. "Is it an earnest
discussion you want or is it something else?" he asked. "You side-
stepped one question, then another, and are now jumping to a third.
Disarmament is the question of questions. We want you to get us
right, so I must set out our stand in detail"

Nevertheless, Walter Reuther hastened to give the floor to
Rieve for fresh questions. The latter raised several questions about
the role of state ownership in the capitalist and socialist countries,
about democracy and -dictatorship, control of the press and radio,
exchange of information, and so on. He, too, repeated the attacks
which hostile propaganda usually makes on the Soviet Union and
the other socialist countries.

It was obvious from the manner in which Rieve put his ques-
tions that he had an exceedingly vague, and in many cases false,
notion of Soviet realities.

Walter Reuther, who watched his colleague put questions ac-
cording to the notes that lay in front of him, prompted Rieve to be
sure to inquire about the one-party system. But Rieve ignored that

N. S. Khrushchev said that the questions raised by Rieve were
elementary and that in the Soviet Union they were studied in
political study groups of the elementary type.

Then Walter Reuther, in an obvious effort to give the discus-
sion a sharper turn, put an additional question. "Does the system of
state ownership necessitate dictatorship which rules out democracy?"
he asked.

While, in answering Rieve, N. S. Khrushchev described the dif-
ference between state ownership in the socialist countries, where the
means of production belong to the entire people, and state ownership
in the capitalist countries, where nationalization of the means of
production leaves them in the hands of the bourgeoisie, the ruling
class, Mr. Reuther suddenly said that "the highest degree of socialism
has been achieved in Israel," where, so he said, 60 per cent of indus-
try belongs to the trade unions.

Asked who in that case was in power in Israel, Mr. Reuther
failed to give a direct reply.

N. S. Khrushchev explained that the fundamental issue in char-

130

acterizing a particular social system is that of state power, of whom
it belongs to whether the working class, working people in general,
or the exploiting classes. If state power is held by the people, the
means of production are socialist, public property. Not so when
nationalization of the means of production is carried out under con-
ditions where power belongs to the capitalists. N. S. Khrushchev said
that the Communists are proponents of the dictatorship of the work-
ing class and that the tasks of socialist construction can only be
effectively carried out if state power passes into the hands of the
working people. Working-class dictatorship, far from ruling out
democracy, provides every condition for the development of genuine
democracy. It is in itself the highest form of democracy.

Walter Reuther said again that the Prime Minister was prob-
ably "tired" and that they must hurry and ask other questions. This
brought the following sarcastic comment from N. S. Khrushchev:
"Will you have strength enough to vie with me? Fm in good form.
I will not tire of fighting for the working-class cause as long as I live.
Let us have a business-like talk if you want it Our time isn't limited. 1 *

Joseph Curran, President of the National Maritime Union, said
he wanted to ask what he called a question from everyday life. "I
was in the Soviet Union in the thirties," he said, "when we delivered
equipment purchased by you. We are pleased with the technical pro-
gress you have made. I should like to know whether the collective
bargaining system will develop as technology makes progress in your
industry, and whether the workers will have the right to strike. How
do trade unions defend the interests of the working people?*'

"I see what you mean," N. S. Khrushchev said. "I'm glad that
you have the class instinct in dealing with questions of trade-union
activity. But it seems that you have no idea at all of conditions in a
socialist state, of the position of the working class there or of the
role of the trade unions. You measure everything with the yardstick
you are accustomed to in the United States."

Seeing that Curran took an interest in the explanation which
the head of the Soviet Government was giving, Victor Reuther began
talking about the "personality cult."

Curran cut him short. "Why do you butt in!" he said

N. S. Khrushchev went on, speaking to Curran:

"I like your question because it is so forthright, and I will give
you a forthright answer. We had strikes in the first few years after
the October Revolution. I myself used to go to the striking workers
to talk to them. Nowadays our workers do not strike. Why? You'll

131

find the answer to that question if you recall certain facts. In what
capitalist country would the government draw up plans to raise
working-class living standards without the workers exerting pressure
on it? It is more than one can imagine that in the capitalist countries
wages would be raised while the working day was reduced, without
the workers striking to achieve it. But in the Soviet Union this matter
is being handled as a priority task. The government, the workers and
the trade unions are cooperating closely in the matter of increasing
wages further while reducing working hours. All we need is to lay the
economic groundwork for it. Speaking tentatively, I think that if
our proposal for general and complete disarmament were accepted,
we could begin the transition to a six-hour working day and higher
wages much earlier than 1964, the year envisaged in the seven-year
plan. Soviet workers are always abreast of their country's economic
development and know well whether or not there are, at any given
moment, practical possibilities for a further rise in wages."

Curran thanked N. S. Khrushchev for his answer.

Walter Reuther made a fresh attempt to sharpen the discus-
sion by alleging that the Soviet trade unions were "an extension of
the government," and wanted to know why the Soviet trade unions
did not come out against the Party. Some of the unionists asked for
the floor but Reuther would not listen, and tried to speak for all
of them.

"You are like a nightingale," N. S. Khrushchev said, smiling.
"It closes its eyes when it sings, and sees nothing and hears nobody
but itself." The audience burst out laughing and Mr. Reuther flushed.
Nevertheless, he kept harping on his point, posing as a defender of
Soviet workers.

"Why do you stick your nose into other people's plans?" N. S.
Khrushchev asked. "The Soviet workers settle their problems by
themselves, and get along without outside interference. There will
be no real talk as long as you keep trying to lecture others."

"There is such a thing as international working-class solidarity,"
Reuther declared pompously.

"You dare talk about international solidarity after you've split
the World Federation of Trade Unions and opposed your trade
unions to those of most countries of the world," N. S. Khrushchev
replied.

Reuther made no answer. He hastened to pass to another ques-
tion as he did each time that he had nothing to say, and gave the
floor to Knight.

132

Knight asked two questions. He casually raised the question of
so-called free elections in Germany. His utterances on the so-called
"Hungarian question" were in the same vein.

"Do you know anything about the German Democratic Repub-
lic?" N. S. Khrushchev asked him. "Have you ever been there? I
have been there more than once and I can tell you that the German
Democratic Republic is built on a most democratic foundation. All
matters there are decided by a democratically elected government.
Private ownership of the means of production has been abolished
there and state power belongs to the working people. The working
class of the German Democratic Republic is headed by the Socialist
Unity Party of Germany, a party devoted to the interests of the work-
ing class. There are also other democratic parties there. As regards
elections in Germany, that is an internal affair of the Germans them-
selves, as I have said repeatedly. Let them do as they decide between
themselves. No one has a right to interfere in their internal affairs."

N. S. Khrushchev then firmly repelled attempts to pull the
so-called Hungarian question out of the bag again.

During the discussion of this question Mr. Reuther unwittingly
betrayed shocking ignorance. He began to "defend" Comrade Janos
Kadar as if Kadar were a bourgeois nationalist It was not until his
colleagues burst out laughing, intimating that he meant Imre Nagy,
that Reuther began to correct himself awkwardly.

Commenting on Reuther's attitude in "defending" the Hungarian
people, N. S. Khrushchev said:

"The Hungarian People's Republic has its own Constitution, its
legislation and its lawful government, elected by democratic pro-
cedure. It is developing freely, and has made considerable progress
in socialist constructioa What happened in Hungary in 1956? There
was a revolt of anti-popular elements there, who were dissatisfied
with the working people's rule. The Hungarian counterrevolution,
instigated by international reactionary forces, sought to overthrow
the socialist system. In doing so, the conspirators used arms received
from the West. They acted on instructions also coming from the
West Having seized power in Budapest for a few days, the counter-
revolutionaries began to commit outrages, to shoot and otherwise
exterminate honest people. At that crucial moment, the Hungarian
Revolutionary Government headed by Janos Kadar asked for our
aid. We complied with that request, and we are proud of it If we
had not come to the aid of the people's government headed by Janos
Kadar, the fascists might have seized power in Hungary. By render-

133

ing the Hungarian people fraternal assistance in their struggle against
the fascist rebels, we did our international duty."

Phillips proposed passing to a fresh subject, and echoed the
claims repeatedly made by capitalist spokesmen in interviews with
N. SL Khrushchev in the United States regarding unhampered circu-
lation of reactionary literature and anti-Soviet information in the
USSR.

"What is your favorite dish?" N. S. Khrushchev asked Phillips.
"Roast beef," Phillips replied.

"And I prefer borshch," N. S. Khrushchev said. "You don't eat
it, but Fm very fond of it You are for capitalism and I am for
socialism. Why am I not answering your question in greater detail?
For the simple reason that I have been asked that question many
times here and have answered it each time. It seems that you don't
like my reply and wish to hear something different But there's noth-
ing to be done about it you and we have different notions of free-
dom. When we were in Hollywood they danced the cancan for us.
The girls who dance it have to pull up their skirts and show their
backsides. They are good honest actresses but have to perform that
dance. They are compelled to adapt themselves to the tastes of
depraved people. People in your country will go to see it, but Soviet
people would scorn such a spectacle. It is pornographic. It is the
culture of surfeited and depraved people. Showing that sort of films
is called freedom in this country. Such 'freedom' doesn't suit us. You
seem to like the 'freedom' of looking at backsides. But we prefer the
freedom to think, to exercise our mental faculties, the freedom of
creative progress."

"Do you want such films to be banned?" Phillips asked
"I think there should be such a law," N. S. Khrushchev replied,
"a moral law. 7 *

"I'm free to see or not to see such films," Carey said.
"But your children see things like that!"
"I have no children."

"But other people have. Good children, who live on earth,"
N. S. Khrushchev remarked. "And you and we should protect them
from bad influences spread under the guise of 'free cultural ex-
change/ "

Some of the unionists then contended that the Soviet Union
was reluctant for some reason to expand Soviet-American cultural
relations. N. S. Khrushchev refuted that false assertioa He stressed
that in reality it was the American side which was stalling, and

134

Citizens of San Francisco welcoming Khrushchev.

suggested that G. A. Zhukov, Chairman of the State Committee f<
Cultural Relations, who was present, be asked to inform them on tJ
matter. But the U.S. trade-union leaders avoided that.

"Well read about it in the papers," one of them said
Speaking of exchanges of information, N. S. Khrushchev pointe
out that Soviet people are for exchanging truthful information, sue
as would make for a durable peace and closer relations betwee
peoples. P. A. Satyukov, Editor-in-Chief of Pravda, who was presei
at the discussion, pointed out that Pravda had published in full tl
speeches made at the Washington conference on unemploymei
called by U.S. trade unions, without changing a single word in thei
while the American newspapers for some reason had not carric
them, describing them as "Red propaganda"

"You and we have different views regarding exchanges of infc
mation and a number of other matters," N. S. Khrushchev said "B
that doesn't mean we cannot find a common language on problem
that are of interest to the peoples of our countries. We say to yoi
*Rise higher, try to take a broader view of events. Don't look ;
things from the tower you've built for yourselves. Come to 01
country, see how Soviet workers live and work, how our trade unio:
function, how they defend the workers' interests. You and we a

135

proach things differently; we are advancing to communism along the
path we have chosen, while you want to bolster capitalism.' In other
words, our attitudes are different Let us recognize this indisputable
fact. But couldn't we try and find common ground for businesslike
cooperation? We think we could. The whole working class needs such
cooperation in the struggle for its fundamental interests, for peace.

**We did not come to this meeting to aggravate relations they
are bad enough as it is," N. S. Khrushchev remarked. "If we fling
accusations at each other, it won't do the working class any good
Let's be reasonable, let's not bring up questions which separate us.
Let's pool our efforts in the struggle for world peace."

But Feller asked another question in the cold war spirit Read-
ing from a sheet, he repeated the false propaganda that the workers
are oppressed in the socialist countries and have to escape abroad

A. I. Adzhubei, Editor-in-Chief of Izvestia, who was also present,
pointed out that Feller was repeating word for word what was
printed in that day's New York Times.

"Think of what you are doing," N. S. Khrushchev said, "You
would repeat articles published in the bourgeois press, and I should
answer you. Start reading the proletarian press and then you will
see what's what sooner."

N. S. Khrushchev observed that Weaver, a Negro present at the
discussion, had made several attempts to ask a question but that
Reuther persisted in ignoring him for some reason.

This isn't a democratic way of holding a discussion," N. S.
Khjushchev said "Let the black man speak It's a shame, really. You
stiM have places in this country which Negroes aren't allowed to
enter."

Weaver said that the U.S. trade unions were fighting against
racial discrimination and that they accorded him the honor of rep-
resenting the U.S. labor movement at some international conferences.
Two weeks ago, he said, he had attended a conference of the World
Federation of United Nations Associations in Geneva.

At the conference, Weaver noted with satisfaction, the U.S. and
Soviet delegations had cooperated closely. They had drafted a joint
resolution aimed at ending the cold war, and it had been carried
Weaver pointed out, however, that the U.S. delegation and the
delegations of the socialist countries had differed on many jpoints
and had had sharp clashes over them.

He asked N. S. Khrushchev how a start should be made and
how common ground could, be found for cooperatioa "If s important

136

for our people to have answers to the questions asked here tonight,
Weaver said.

"I know that your trade unions are doing a good deal for th
Negroes to become equal citizens of the USA t " N. S. Khrushche*
replied. "As regards the questions on which there is no agreemen
between your trade unions and those of the socialist countries, yoi
know that you and we differ in our approach to many social phenc
mena, and appraise them differently.

"In our opinion, trade unions should have more frequent con
tacts. Everything cannot be settled overnight, of course. But shouli
cooperation between trade unions begin to develop and strengthen
on specific points, if only minor ones to begin with, the two countrie
will in the end come to join efforts. You cannot gain an understand
ing of the attitude of our trade unions overnight, just as our trad
unionists cannot gain overnight an understanding of all that you hav<
That is why both you and we should take a good look at each othei
examine each other's activities and get to know them better, W
may have disputes and disagreements. But if you and we want t
promote peace and improve the living conditions of workers, c
working people, why aggravate relations? After all, that would benefi
none but our common enemies.

"Do you want our socialist system changed? I hope not. We, fc
our part, don't want to interfere in your internal affairs and will nc
do it won't try to bring about a change in the system you have, W
have said in the past and say now: 'Let us be more tolerant towar
each other. Though we differ with you on many questions, we hav
a common cause for the sake of which we should join our effort
It is the struggle for peace. The peoples want peace, and are fightin
for it'

"As for specific questions of the trade-union movement, I mui
admit that I've never worked in tb^t field and am no expert, bi
we have experienced trade unionists. Why don't you contact them
They will not try to make Communists out of you and I think thi
you, too, will not make supporters of capitalism out of them. But a
exchange of views between you and them would, no doubt, be useful

James Carey, Vice-President of the AFL-CIO, who spoke at tl
close of the discussion, thanked N. S. Khrushchev for the meetin

"Thank you," he said, "for giving us so much df your tim
Good-bye and good luck. Let's work together for peace, for the goc
of man.'*

The meeting ended in a friendly atmosphere. In parting, tl

137

union leaders thanked the head of the Soviet Government again and
again for the meeting.

In view of the foregoing, it was really surprising that a news
conference was held right after the meeting, at which Mr. Reuther
did not hesitate in the opinion of the Soviet press group grossly to
distort the substance of the discussion and attack the man whom he
and his colleagues had just received as a guest of honor. Mr. Reuther
went so far as to allege that N. S. Khrushchev had in the course of
the discussion "pounded the table and shouted, 'I am the dictator
of the working class.*"

This sort of statement is plainly intended for people who
have no idea whatever of the Soviet Union or its leaders. It is not
mere chance that many bourgeois correspondents asked N. S. Khrush-
chev to comment on the utterly incredible statement which Mr.
Reuther had made about the meeting.

"I don't know whether Mr. Reuther actually said that or whether
it was attributed to him by unscrupulous journalists," N. S. Khrush-
chev replied "Did he really say that?"

Journalists who had attended the news conference confirmed
that Mr. Reuther had made the statement in question. Then N. S.
Khrushchev said:

"If Mr. Reuther made such a statement, he acted dishonestly.
It's a lie. I cannot respect a man who resorts to such methods. In
our interview, we spoke of the dictatorship of the working class and
not any personal dictatorship. Marxism-Leninism maintains that when
power passes into the hands of the working class, it has to establish
a dictatorship of its own to suppress the resistance of the overthrown
exploiting classes. The forms of working-class dictatorship may vary
in different countries. If the deposed class puts up no resistance to
the new that is born in the course of the historical development of
society, as a result of revolution, the working class has no need to
use forcible means of suppression. But if the exploiters try to turn
back the wheel of history, to prevent the people from taking power,
if they try to strangle the revolution, then the working class, working
people in general, must, in the name of their vital interests, use
means of suppression to maintain their social gains and to defend
the vital interests of the working masses, of the entire people."

N. S. Khrushchev stressed that as it advances to communism
the Soviet Union is carrying out more and more extensive measures
leading to the withering away of the state. "We have already carried
out a number of far-reaching measures in that field," he said. "We

138

are reducing our armed forces and militia, and cutting the number
of state security workers. An increasing number of functions involved
in the maintenance of law and order and in state administration are
being transferred to public organizations."

What is the outcome of the interview between the U.S. union
leaders and the head of the Soviet Government?

The very fact that the interview took place suggests that the
political situation in the USA is taking a turn for the better. However
strong anti-Soviet sentiment may be with some U.S. trade-union
leaders, the growing urge of the American people for better U.S.-
Soviet relations and for a durable peace is gaining the upper hand.

It will be recalled that so far the U.S. trade-union leadership
has persisted in avoiding all contacts with the Soviet Union. Many
speeches made by Meany, President of the AFL-CIO, hardly differed
in substance from speeches made by reactionary-minded leaders of
U.S. imperialism. Speaking at a trade-union congress in San Francisco
as recently as September 21, 1959, Meany violently attacked the
Soviet Union and the Soviet Government in the cold war spirit
This attitude of Meany's and his associates' is at variance with the
sentiments of ordinary Americans, who want a durable peace and
friendly relations between the USA and the Soviet Union.

This must have been the reason why the group of AFL-CIO
leaders found it necessary to invite N. S. Khrushchev, head of the
Soviet Government, to an interview to discuss some important prob-
lems of international life and Soviet-American relations.

It is reasonable to believe that that interview may serve as a
good start and will help pave the way for the necessary contacts
between American and Soviet trade unions.

Those contacts are indispensable and could be most fruitful
in the struggle for the common cause of promoting universal peace.

As regards those who persist, trying to stay on the cold war
bandwagon, they are merely exposing their true colors before the
eyes of the working people of the world.

The vital interests of the working class call for unity in the
struggle for peace. "Though we differ with you on many questions/*
N. S. Khrushchev said in his conversation with the U.S* trade union-
ists, "we have a common cause for the sake of which we should
join our efforts. It is the struggle for peace."

It is deplorable that reactionary U.S. trade-union leaders are
trying to aggravate matters at a time when there are signs of better

139

relations between the Soviet Union and the United States, and of
a more wholesome mternatkmal climate.

No matter how hard reactionary-minded U.S. trade-union lead-
ers try to conceal the appeal to unity voiced by the head of the
Soviet Government or to distort his statements, the truth will
triumph. One indication of this is the fact that Americans received
the head of the Soviet Government with great warmth everywhere,
all along the route of his U.S. tour. That warm welcome is a genuine
expression of the American people's urge for peace and friendship
with the Soviet people.

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV AT A MEETING
WITH LONGSHOREMEN OF THE PACIFIC COAST

N. S. Khrushchev called at the Longshoremen's Union of the Pacific
Coast on September 21. At the request of the workers he addressed the
people assembled with a brief message of greetings.

Allow me to address you the way we Soviet workers are accus-
tomed to addressing each other comrades! (Stormy applause. Cries
of greetings.) I express sincere gratitude to Harry Bridges, the chair-
man of your union, for the kind invitation. During my stay in the
United States I have met with ordinary Americans and with your
public men. I received the impression that Americans want peace.
We greet such a desire as we ourselves want a stable peace! (Stormy
applause. Cries in Russian and in English: "Mir!", "Peace!") I thank
you dear friends for the warm reception. (Stormy applause.) I con-
vey greetings to you from Soviet workers, and on returning home
shall convey to them your greetings. (Stormy applause.) I would like
to wish you what workers desire. And what do workers desire! ("Cries:
"Peace!") That is true peace. It is necessary that there be peace.
Besides this, I hope that you always have work and good wages.
(Stormy applause.) Good-bye friends! (Stormy applause. Cries of
"Peace/" "Friendship!" "Good-bye, Khrushchev!")

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S SPEECH

AT THi IBM CORPORATION PIANT IN SAN JOSE

On September 21, N. S. Khrushchev and his party visited the IBM
Corp. plant in San Jose, Calif.

Thomas Watson, president of the corporation, warmly welcomed
the head of the Soviet Government. N. S. Khrushchev made a reply
speech:

Mr. President of the Corporation, I wish to thank you from the
bottom of my heart for the reception you have accorded my party

140

and myself, I like very much the method of self-service used here
in your cafeteria. We are using the same method, but not widely
enough. Your example is worthy of imitation at our own factories.
I must point out an agreeable thing when I meet businessmen,
we find a common language in our conversations. Being men of
action, we are quick to understand each other and get down to
business-like talk. I like that.

But when I meet and talk with certain trade-union or other
political leaders, things don't always take the desired turn. In your
remarks, Mr. President, you spoke well of your system. And that is
understandable, because everyone defends his own system. We keep
our own opinion.

I remember a story for children, in which the following cir-
cumstance is aptly brought out: the snipe asks the quail to come and
see him. They have the following conversation. Well, what* s it like
living in a field?* asks the snipe. 'It's dry there, with no water.' 'But
I live in a marsh. It's good to live in a marsh!*

*You rot in your marsh,* answered the quaiL *You know nothing
of dry land. But look how nice it is where I live, with the sun shining
and flowers all around.'

The snipe and the quail didn't see eye to eye, and each thought
he was right

That's what sometimes happens to people. Each thinks his own
system the best. Let us not argue this point You believe your way
of life to be better, and we think our way of life is better. Time will
show who lives in a marsh and who soars in the sky. At any rate,
our communist Lunik is now on the moon, looking down at the
earth, wondering how soon its American brother will follow it
(Laughter, applause.)

We are having a peaceful, friendly chat with you. The President
here has set the right tone like a good conductor. We mustn't aggra-
vate relations, mustn't raise questions that can only be settled by
reality itself in due course. Let us not argue those questions, because
the deeper we get involved in argument, the more the strings will
tighten, while we must loosen the strings, not tighten them, so as
to come closer to each other, to be friends and do everything to
assure world peace. (Applause.)

We want to be friends with the American people and the
American Government I stress, the Government, making no dis-
tinction between people and government, because that is the only
condition on which we can achieve the results we are striving for,

141

that is to say, friendly relations between our countries, and peaceful
coexistence. Some people ask me what is peaceful coexistence. I have
already explained that repeatedly and am willing to do so patiently
again and again. If there's anyone who doesn't understand, let him
reflect some more. If he still doesn't understand, he evidently isn't
mature yet. Then let him develop some more, and reality will bring
it home to him, perhaps he will knock bumps on his head before
he realizes how essential is peaceful coexistence. To put it in a
nutshell, peaceful coexistence means that states with opposite systems
should live in peace, without wars. (Applause.)

Thank you for your attention. Thank you. (Applause.)

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV

AT A RECEPTION IN SAN FRANCISCO

On the evening of September 21, the municipal authorities, business
circles and public of San Francisco gave a reception in honor of N. S.
Khrushchev.

The guest speakers were Chairman of the North California Council
for International Affairs Rockwell, Mayor Christopher, Governor
Brown, the President's special representative Henry Cabot Lodge and
Chairman of the Commonwealth Club Johnson.

The floor was then given to N. S. Khrushchev.

MAYOR CHRISTOPHER, GOVERNOR BROWN, CHAIRMAN ROCKWELL, MR.
JOHNSON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I am very grateful to you for this invitation to address such
an esteemed gathering.

We came to San Francisco from Los Angeles. We traveled along
the lovely coast, admired the beauties of the California landscape
and saw your bountiful land. All along the route the California sun
shone just as benevolently as the sun in the Crimea, where I spent
my vacation before coming to the USA.

But it is not sunlight alone that warms our hearts so far from
home. We are being met and received cordially by the Californians.
We would like the friendship between our peoples to be as inex-
tinguishable and bright as your southern sun. (Prolonged applause.)

It is a pleasure to see a rich and beautiful land. And it is an
even greater pleasure to see how ably you utilize the riches of
California. When the first European, the Portuguese traveler Juan
Rodriguez Cabrillo, set foot in California in 1542 it was an unex-
plored territory with virgin forests of giant sequoias, many of which

142

were already almost a thousand years old, and with incalculable
wealth oil and gold lying untouched in the ground

But are gold and oil the only riches of California? You have
everything: trout and salmon, cotton the priceless "white gold"
oranges, grapes and redwood, minerals and huge reserves of "blue
coal"

Yours is a fertile land, ladies and gentlemen, and your city of
San Francisco is magnificent Its coast is lapped by the waves of the
Pacific, whose waters also wash the shores of the Soviet Far East

I did not have the opportunity of coming to your city by sea, but
I know that the entrance there is through the Golden Gate, I would
like to express the confidence that the day is not distant when this
Golden Gate will open hospitably for Soviet ships bringing goods you
need to your country, and American merchant ships will pass through
this gate bound for ports in the Soviet Unioa (Applause.)

At one time Russian people, too, reached California across the
Pacific, You know, of course, that some of the towns and commu-
nities here still have Russian names.

Khrushchev answers greetings of San Francisco citizens.

143

The American West traded with our country for many years.
And it is just lately that Soviet-American trade has been brought
to practically a standstill

I have already said on several occasions that we have come to
the United States with an open heart and honest intentions. We want
only one thing: to live in peace and friendship with you and with
other nations. I think that the esteemed Californians gathered here
share these feelings and aspirations. (Applause.)

Americans who have visited the Soviet Union bring home dif-
ferent opinions about our country and about its life. But all of them
will confirm that the words "peace" and "friendship" are heard at
every step in the Soviet Union. These words are laid out in white
stone along railways, they are written in flowers in gardens, squares
and parks, and traced on the walls of houses. They are in the heart
of every Soviet citizen. The reason for this is that through peaceful
labor the Soviet people endeavor to protect themselves and the whole
world from the horrors of war. We know very well what war is and
although we are strong we do not want mankind ever again to go
through the calamities and destruction of war. (Applause.)

It goes without saying that the best way to avert war, to eradi-
cate it at its roots, is to destroy the means of waging war.

At the United Nations a few days ago the Soviet Government
submitted a proposal on general and complete disarmament with the
establishment of unlimited inspection. A little earlier, at the end of
August, the Soviet Government passed a decision not to resume
nuclear tests if such tests are not resumed by the Western Powers.

The Soviet Union will persist in its efforts to achieve a complete
cessation of nuclear weapons tests, considering this to be an impor-
tant step toward ending the nuclear arms race and removing the
menace to the lives and health of millions of people.

Everybody is well aware that the settlement of these problems
is not all that is essential for the preservation of peace. Survivals of
the Second World War likewise harbor the danger of a new war,
and therefore this problem, too, has to be settled.

In proposing a peace treaty with Germany, with due regard to
the fact that there are two German states, we are not seeking any
unilateral benefits or advantages for ourselves. What advantages can
there be when the question is to extinguish the still smoldering
embers of a past conflagration?

The Soviet Union has on many occasions pointed out that its

144

aim is to normalize the situation in Germany, which would also
eliminate the abnormal situation in Berlin.

I shall not go into detail. We have already had and will still
have frank talks on many questions with the President of the USA,
Mr. Dwight D. Eisenhower. It is to be hoped that as a result of our
talks both sides will draw considerably nearer to a settlement of
pressing international issues, and that, in the final analysis, will
stfengthen world peace and security.

To arrive at a correct solution of urgent problems as quickly
as possible, all prejudice and ill-will must be swept aside. It is just
in this way that Soviet people approach the questions dividing us.
We want to understand you and your motives better. But that calls
for reciprocity. You must also understand us well and understand
our motives. The Soviet Union is not seeking any benefits for itself.
All we want is that war should not threaten people anywhere on
earth. (Prolonged applause.)

Properly speaking, I have finished the address I prepared for
such a representative and esteemed gathering. But if you have no
objection I should like to add a thing or two. I feel I must share with
you the impressions I have gained today. (Applause.)

It was a great pleasure to take a drive through the city, to see
your bay from a ship, not for the purpose of spying out anything
but of admiring your lovely coast and splendid bay with the most
sincere feeling of friendship. (Animation, applause.)

I thank the officials of the Longshoremen's Union and the own-
ers or contractors (I do not know how you call them), who organize
shipments, for inviting me to visit them. The friendly talk at the
Council of this trade union gave me pleasure. I shall long remember
this wonderful day. I acquired one thing in San Francisco: A long-
shoreman gave me his cap, and in token of my appreciation I gave
him my Soviet hat. (Laughter, applause.) For me it will be a pleasant
souvenir of San Francisco. (Applause.)

When we drove with Mr. Lodge along the fine roads you have
built, it gave me great pleasure to see the people meeting us. They
came out into the streets, perhaps by chance or possibly with the
express purpose of seeing what the foreigner who had come to them,
and who was a confirmed Communist and the Prime Minister of the
great Soviet Union, was like. We saw smiles and expressions of kind,
friendly feelings. (Applause.)

It was a great pleasure to visit the computer plant, where we
were accorded a very warm welcome. Allow me to express special

145

thanks here to Mr. Watson, President of the International Business
Machines Corp., who showed us great courtesy, talked warmly with
us and spoke very well and with great understanding of the need
to improve relations between our countries. He is a very likeable
man, and for us he is all the more likeable for having been in the
Soviet Union and seen the life and work of our factories. (Anima-
tion, applause.)

The plant we toured produces computer machines. That is
evidently very interesting, but I am not a specialist in this field and
for that reason in the given case my evaluation means nothing. In
the Soviet Union we too produce computer machines, and I do not
know who makes them better, or whose machines are better, yours
or ours. That too remains to be seen. (Animation.) We. have seen
your computing machines, but you have not seen ours. Perhaps ours
are better. The production of computing machines is kept secret for
the time being, but I do not think much time will elapse before these
secrets are made available to everybody who might benefit by them.
(Animation, applause.)

I repeat that I can be shown factories of this kind, because I
will not take advantage of any secrets. (Laughter, applause.)

Speaking of secrets, I remember when the preparations for the
launching of our first rocket were completed, the scientists invited
members of the government to inspect it We walked round the
rocket, peered here and there, examined it on all sides (animation),
but we do not know how it works, or, as people say, "what gravy it's
eaten with." I think "secrets" like these can be shown to many
people: They, too, will look, and feel, but won't understand a thing.
(Animation, applause.)

I repeat, we are very grateful to the engineers, employees and
workers of this factory, who were so kind to us during our visit to
their factory. I am particularly satisfied with the cooks, who prepared
a splendid meat I enjoyed the dishes into which the cooks had put
their culinary art, their skill. In this question of how meals are
prepared, I think everybody, the specialist and the non-specialist
alike, is more or less at home. (Laughter, applause.)

I very much regret that I had no opportunity today of visiting
the Research Institute at Stanford, whose director or, to use your
term, president, is the esteemed scientist Mr. Finley Carter. Our
scientist, Professor Yemelyanov, went there today. That is good, of
course, but I wanted to go, too. However, you cannot, as Kozma
Prutkov said, embrace the unembraceable. You do not know and,

146

in fact, nobody knows him, because he never existed physically, but
the utterances, which in my country are known as the aphorisms of
Kozma Prutkov, are really good. (Animation.)

I should like to add a few words to what I have already said
about your lovely city of San Francisco. When the Second World
War ended and our soldiers came home, the ones who had fought
for the liberation of Bulgaria brought back a good song about that
country. You know that the Soviet people are especially warmly
disposed toward the Bulgarian people. The Russians and Bulgarians
are brother nations. Their languages are very much alike. When the
Bulgarians were ruled by the Turks, the Russians always had a
brotherly feeling for them. Russians shed a lot of blood to help the
Bulgarians free themselves from the Turkish yoke. We also helped
the Greeks to liberate themselves, Mr. Christopher. (Laughter,
applause.) (Mr. Christopher, Mayor of San Francisco, is of Greek
origin. Ed.)

Now then, this song contains the following lines: "Beautiful is
the land of Bulgaria, but Russia is the best of all ..." I would some-
what re-word this song and say: "Beautiful are the cities of the
United States that I have visited, but San Francisco is the best of
all" (Stormy applause, cries of approval.)

Ladies and gentlemen, allow me now to express my most sincere
gratitude to all of today's speakers. I shall not name them or single
anyone outall of them are worthy people and they spoke well I do
not know who among you is the chief organizer, but he lias shown
his skill in arranging this meeting. I tender you my heartfelt grati-
tude for everything. (Applause.)

The people of San Francisco have bewitched us. I felt I was
among friendly people, who have the same thoughts as the peoples
of the Soviet Union! To prove this I can tell you of something that
happened when we drove about the city. Our car stopped acci-
dentally in front of a house and I asked an ordinary woman, who
happened to be near us, what she would like, what her wishes were
She replied, "My only wish is that there should be peace on earth,
that there should be no war." I think she expressed the thoughts and
wishes of all people adults, men and women, and children, because
peace is in the heart and on the lips of each one of them both in
the Soviet Union and here in the United States of America. All the
nations of the world want peace. (Stormy applause.)

The main thing we must now seek is not the questions on which
we disagree. These have stuck so deeply in the throats of everyone

147

that we cannot extract them, hard as we try. We must seek out what
we have in common, so as to build up our relations on that, to achieve
better mutual understanding, and to draw closer to each other in
questions where we can find common ground.

Do you iniagine you can convince me that the capitalist system
is better than the socialist? Neither do I want to think that I can
convince you that the communist system is better. Evidently, we
shall each maintain our opinions, but that must not prevent us from
living in friendship, from being good neighbors and showing concern
about improving relations between our countries. (Prolonged
applause.)

1 would like to assure you, ladies and gentlemen, that I have no
intention at all of calling you into the communist realm. I am simply
telling you perhaps you will yet recall my words when you get a
better knowledge of Soviet people, their thoughts and aspirations.
You may not agree just now, but the time will come when you will
admit that Communists have the noblest of thoughts and aspirations.
We strive to build a commttaist society based on the loftiest of ideals.
Communism is not yet our present, but our future. But we are already
building it We are building a society where man is the friend of
man, where no enmity exists, where no blood is shed, where all people
are equal These great human ideals should also be understandable
to religious people, to people who are not Communists. From the
Scriptures they ought to remember the exhortation to love their
neighbor, and so on.

Do not judge Soviet people, Communists, only by the period
of the Civil War. The Civil War was imposed on our people and they
were forced to repulse their enemies. Your American ancestors also
fought a bitter Civil War when the North fought the South, and
killed one another in that war. The best people of your country fought
for the democratic ideas held aloft by Lincoln, and they won.

At present we are waging our fight for communism with the
best of human motives. We are not waging it, arms in hand, but with
the word, by peaceful means, with our labor. Let those who do not
wish to accept our convictions retain their own. We understand
people who respect their own system. (Applause.)

Mr. Mayor Christopher, my friends and I greatly appreciate the
kind feelings you have expressed. But I hesitate to speak in your
praise. Your election campaign will soon start, and I would not like
people to think that I am meddling in your internal affairs. Your

148

opponent might ask why Khrushchev spoke about you and said
nothing about him. (Laughter, applause.)

We had a conversation with Mr. Christopher. I told him that I
had not decided yet for whom I would vote were I given an oppor-
tunity to do so. I will give it further thought and perhaps tell him
at the end of the dinner, depending on how good the dinner is.
(Animation.) I must say that you are winning in that respect: The
food has been deliciously prepared and served in abundance, so that
by all outward signs I ought to vote for you; but, I repeat, I'll give
that further thought (Laughter, applause.)

From this distinguished rostrum I should like to thank the
manager of the store which we were so kindly shown. It is an excel-
lent store. America is a rich country, but we have no wish to impose
upon your wealth. At the moment we are producing less than you,
but we will put our backs to it and produce more. This will not
harm you in any way, but will contribute to the prosperity of our
country, of our people. (Applause.)

I consider it my duty here in San Francisco to say a few words
about your neighbor, the city of Los Angeles and its people. (Anima-
tion.) I want to say some good things about these people.

We were pleased with the meetings we had with the population
of Los Angeles. But something unforeseen happened there, I was
told that when we were driving through the city, the car of the Chief
of Police drove in front of us. Some individual who must have had
either too much or too little sense, threw a tomato, perhaps even a
good tomato, and it hit that car. (Animation.) The Chief of Police
then displayed his authority and deprived us of the pleasure of
seeing the fabulous world of Disneyland, which was put down in our
itinerary. (Laughter, applause.)

I am grateful to the Chief of Police for his concern about my
welfare, but I would say that he showed too much zeal. He should
have acted more calmly. I am sure that if we had gone to Disneyland
nothing but good would have come of it But, after all, you do come
across superstitious people! There was a case like this even with so
great a man as Pushkin, the Russian poet It is said that one day in
winter a black cat ran across the road when he drove out in a sleigh,
and because of that he turned back But that was long ago. In our
day we should not be deterred by a "black cat"; we should have
carried on with the pre-arranged program. I think everything would
have been all right. (Applause.)

149

Now I should like to say a few words in defense and if not in
defense, then in favor of the Mayor of Los Angeles. (Animation.;
When we arrived in Los Angeles, the Mayor and his family received
us very cordially. He has a very charming wife and wonderful daugh-
ters. But at the dinner he made a speech which was not altogether
happy. You do get unhappy speeches. Many of you have probably
spoken on many occasions. Tell me frankly, ladies and gentlemen,
are you always pleased with the speeches you make? As for me, there
have been instances when I have not been pleased with my speeches.
The same thing also happened to the Mayor of Los Angeles. So let
us find it in our hearts to make allowances for him, for, after all, as
religious people say, "We must forgive our neighbor his trespasses,"
especially if he perceives them. (Animation.) 1 think we should
follow this good custom and consider the unpleasant incident which
happened there as having simply been an accident it did not come
from the heart, nor from the mind. Let us consider the question
closed. (Applause.) There is peace and friendship between us and
the American people and, in particular, the Americans of Los Angeles
and San Francisco. But as today I am speaking in San Francisco,
I show just a little more preference for your city than for Los
Angeles. (Laughter, applause.)

We had an amiable talk with the Mayor of Los Angeles before
his speech, and during that talk I invited him to visit Moscow with
his wife and daughters. I want to say from this rostrum that this
invitation still holds good We shall hospitably receive the Mayor of
Los Angeles and his family in Moscow and drop no hint about his
unhappy speech.

I would have also been pleased to invite you to Moscow, Mr.
Christopher, but I do not know whether or not my invitation will be
to your advantage in the coming elections. That is a very complicated
question for me. I therefore extend this invitation to all of you here,
to all the people of the lovely, verdant and sunny city of San Fran-
cisco y O u are always welcome, come to the Soviet Union, come to
our Moscow, we shall be happy to receive you. (Prolonged applause.)

We have a proverb that says, "He who has not been to Russia
has not seen the world." See our country and perhaps you too will
like it (Stormy applause.)

Allow me to express the hope that our stay in the United States
of America, our meetings with representatives of the business world
and the American public will be of benefit, will help to bring our
countries closer together, and, consequently, to arrive faster at mutu-

150

ally acceptable decisions in the Interests of consolidating peace and
friendship among nations. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen. (Stormy
applause, all rise, ones of approval.)

At the end of the reception, the Mayor of San Francisco, Mr.
Christopher, presented N. S. Khrushchev with a gift a chairman's gavel
made of redwood. Expressing his thanks for the gift, N. S. Khrushchev
said:

In my country we do not use chairmen's gavels at meetings or
official conferences. I therefore do not know where I could use it

I would like the first knock of this gavel to seal an understanding
between the President of the USA, Mr. Eisenhower, and myself on
the conclusion of an agreement a treaty of peace, nonaggression
and cooperation, and best of all of friendship between our countries.
That would be of great benefit to the peoples of our countries and
to the cause of peace throughout the world, (Stormy, prolonged
applause.)

It would also be good if an agreement were reached on the
question of disarmament, so as to put an end to the arms race once
and for all* so that people would cot be threatened with war, so that
they could live among themselves in peace and friendship.

I would be the happiest of men if that were achieved, ladies
and gentlemen. (Stormy, prolonged applause.)

151

IN I O W A September 22-23

SPIiCH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV ON ARRIVING IN DiS MOINES

On September 22 N. S. Khrushchev and his party arrived in Des
Moines, capital of Iowa.

He was met at the airfield by the Governor of Iowa Herschel Love-
less, Mayor lies and representative^ of the Chamber of Commerce.

' Replying to the greetings N. S. Khrushchev said:
MR. GOVERNOR, MR. MAYOR, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I am very pleased to arrive in your state. We know quite a lot
about your state of Iowa and we shall gladly acquaint ourselves with
the life of the people in your state. We know that you occupy first
place in the United States in the production of corn. We shall com-
pete with you, and we think that this competition will be beneficial
both for us and for you.

Thank you for the kind words, for the words of welcome. I think
that our meetings and talks will bring us closer together and will
create the necessary conditions for strengthening peace and friend-
ship between peoples.

Many inhabitants of the city gathered at the entrance of the Fort
Des Moines Hotel where N. S. Khrushchev was staying. Correspondents
of local papers and the TV station asked the head of the Soviet Gov-
ernment to say a few words to the inhabitants of the state of Iowa.

N. S. Khrushchev expressed his satisfaction on arriving on the
state's territory which is famed throughout the world for its achieve-
ments in growing corn and developing animal husbandry.

The pebple in the United States also strive for peace as our
people do. I am very pleased to note this. It is precisely the striving
of both our peoples for peace that induced me to accept President
Eisenhower's invitation and to visit the United States.

Today I saw an interesting poster in English in Des Moines.
It carried the following inscription: "We don't agree with you on
many questions, but we welcome you." This is a sensible slogan. We
also don't agree with you on many matters, but we also greet you.
You can live the way you like best and we shall live the way we
like best, but let us be friends in order to ensure peace between our
peoples.

152

SPEECH BY N. S, KHRUSHCHEV AT THE RECEPTION
IN THE DES M01NES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The Des Moines Chamber of Commerce held a reception in honor
of N. S. Khrushchev the evening of September 22. Speeches were made
by Governor Loveless of Iowa, and by Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., the
President's special representative. N. S. Khrushchev made a speech in
reply.

MR GOVERNOR, MR MAYOR, MR PRESIDENT OF THE CHAMBER, LADIES
AND GENTLEMEN, FRIENDS:

Allow me to thank you for your invitation to visit your state
and its capital, the fine city of Des Moines, and for the warm recep-
tion extended to me and my companions. I am also grateful to the
President of your Chamber of Commerce and his colleagues for
giving rne the opportunity to address you.

I avail myself of the occasion to convey to you, and through
you to the people of the State of Iowa, the heartfelt greetings of the
Soviet people and best wishes for success in life and in your work.

We are happy to visit the State of Iowa whose fame as a leading
farming area has spread far beyond the United States.

In the Soviet Union we are well aware that your state occupies
' an important place in the world output of corn and that you have
some fine achievements in livestock breeding. You will probably be
interested to know that one of the largest farming districts of our
country, Krasnodar Territory, wants to compete ^with Iowa in the
output of farm produce. People in many Cossack villages in the
Kuban area have a good knowledge of what your farms have achieved
in the production of corn, meat, milk and other farm produce.

I have never been in your country before, but I have had many
talks with representatives of the American people and with our
people who had visited America. I remember, in particular, my talks
with Mr. Garst, a fanner from your state, who has visited the Soviet
Union several times. I remember my talks with Senator Ellender
who also spoke about your agriculture. I never miss an opportunity
of seeing films that depict different aspects of life in your country.

The agriculture of the United States, and of your state in par-
ticular, is of great interest to us, above all because it is highly mech-
anized. Some of your farms have achieved a high labor productivity
by mechanizing field work and the feeding of all kinds of farm animals
and poultry. The output per worker is today much higher on your
farms than in our kolkhozes (collective farms). I must say, however,
that some of your economists are mistaken when they mechanically
compare the output figures of your farms and those of our kolkhozes

153

Iowa University students in Ames welcome the head of the Soviet government.

in terms of output per worker. In so doing they fail to consider the
fact that fanning in the Soviet Union and in the United States is
based on absolutely opposite principles.

While your farms are private capitalist enterprises belonging to
individual owners, the kolkhozes in the Soviet Union are socialized
cooperative farms belonging to peasant collectives.

Everything that is economically unprofitable on your farms is
deprived of the right to live and ceases to exist Weaker farms that
have no adequate income and working capital cannot cope with the
situation. They are unable to effect such a high degree of mechaniza-
tion as the large farms, fall behind and are ruined, and their places
are taken by the stronger farms. The law of competition, inherent in
capitalism, operates in your country.

In our country, on the other hand, farming is developing pn
other, that is, socialist principles. The kolkhozes are large cooperative
farms established through the voluntary association of peasant farms.
For this reason, the number of people working on a given farm is
not the minimum necessary to till the soil, cultivate the crops and
raise farm animals and poultry. Rather, it represents the number of
able-bodied workers in the given cooperative. We cannot allow a
state of affairs in which some members of the cooperative work,
while others are deprived of the right to work. We realize that there

154

are shortcomings in the organization of labor and the employment
of manpower in our kolkhozes, and are doing away with these
shortcomings.

Of course, the lag of our farms in the field of mechanization
and labor productivity, as compared with yours, is temporary. The
socialist system of agriculture makes it possible to eliminate the lag
in a brief space of time and to attain higher labor productivity than
on your farms. The socialist system offers boundless scope for pro-
duction development because it knows neither crises nor competitioa
In our country there is not and cannot be the danger that some farm
or another will be ruined. We have a sufficiently high level of scien-
tific farming, and skilled personnel, and a machine-building industry
capable of providing farms with the necessary machinery. We are
endeavoring to effect the comprehensive mechanization of all fann-
ing processes by using modern machinery and making more rational
use of manpower to ensure a high output per farm worker. We have
some fine specialists in mechanization who have achieved greater
labor productivity in the cultivation of corn, cotton, sugar beet and
other crops than that recorded by your best farms.

At the present time we are accelerating the development of the
chemical industry. This will enable us to produce more mineral
fertilizer, weed killers and insecticides, the extensive use of which
will considerably raise the yield of farm crops and increase output
per farm worker. This is one of our big potentialities. We also have
some other big potentialities for the further growth of farm output
We have a large number of tractors and other farm machines.

Today, we are making very good progress in agriculture. In a
short time in just five years we increased the output of grain from
82 million tons in 1953 to 141 million tons in 1958, the amount of
grain purchased by the state rising from 31 million to 57 million
tons. In the course of only three years we brought 90 million acres
of virgin soil under the plow in the eastern regions of our country,
and that is four times the crop area of the State of Iowa. Now we
have considerably more fodder for our cattle. In those same five
years the amount of silage stored increased from 32 million to 148
million tons in 1958, this amount including 108 million tons of corn
silage, of which next to nothing was produced formerly.

In the last five years the cattle herds in our country have
increased by 15 million head, pigs by more than 15 million and
sheep by 30 million head This enabled us to increase state purchases
of meat for consumption by the non-farming population. In eight

155

months of 1959 we have purchased three times more meat than in
the same period of 1953, 23 times more milk, 2.2 times more eggs
and twice as much wool.

Our agriculture has great potentialities and limitless opportu-
nities to further extend the cultivated area, increase the yield of grain
crops and develop livestock breeding.

American farmers, colleagues of yours, who have visited the
Soviet Union, say that there are many points of interest in our
country in the development of science, in biological selection, in the
cultivation of industrial crops and in livestock breeding. I am sure
that your farmers and specialists could make good use of many of
the Soviet achievements in both practical farming and the agricul-
tural sciences. And you, too, have much that is valuable and instruc-
tive. Soviet specialists who have visited the USA speak of your great
achievements in corn cultivation and in poultry raising. You obtain
the greatest increase in poultry weight per unit of feed one kilogram
increase to about two and a half kilograms of feed We must learn
from your experience. We pay due tribute to the knowledge, industry

Photo shows N. S. Khrushchev and his wife Nina Petrovna
(center) talking with Iowa University students in Ames.

156

[ experience of American farmers, scientists, and farm specialists,
ur achievements are worthy of praise and your experience is
thy of study and imitation.

There is much of value that we can learn from each other. I
ik there is no need to speak of the great importance of studying
terience gained in the field of agriculture and of sharing that
>erience. I know there are people who oppose such contacts and
D believe that contacts, an improvement in the economic relations
our countries, would serve the more rapid economic development
the Soviet Union and the more successful fulfillment of its plans,
ne of your country's periodicals carry arables in which an attempt
nade to show that our seven-year plar constitutes the "danger of
Joviet economic offensive." But what, may I ask, is the danger of
endeavor, say, to increase the volume of farm output, and to
om is it dangerous? What harm is there in our desire to compete
h you, say, in the output of corn, meat and milk? I don't suppose
fbody will assert that a greater consumption of milk, butter and
at will make Soviet people more "aggressive"!

It is true that our people have adopted the motto: "Overtake
i outstrip the United States in output per capita of population."
t can this be regarded as a "danger" to Americans? We, for
imple, are by no means inclined to regard the farmers of Iowa
aggressive people simply because today they produce considerably
ire corn and meat than the Kuban kolkhozes. We challenge you to
:ompetition in the output of meat, milk, butter, consumer goods,
tchines, steel, coal and oil, so that people might live better. This
far more beneficial competition than competition in stockpiling
drogen bombs and all sorts of weapons. May there be more corn
i meat, and no hydrogen bombs at all!

Farming is the oldest, the most vital and most peaceful branch
human industry. We want grain to grow in the fields and we want
rhards to blossom, we want the earth to be turned up by peaceful
>ws and not by rockets and tank tracks.

You probably know the breath-taking prospects of peaceful
velopment envisaged in our seven-year plan. You are business
aple and realize full well that whoever turns all his attention to
veloping peace economy, who employs his means and resources to
it end, is not interested in war and war preparations. It is better
trade in agricultural and industrial produce than to continue the
ns race and discrimination in world trade.

The Soviet people are applying all their efforts to peaceful

157

Khrushchev speaking to reporters in Des Moines.

construction Our seven-year plan envisages an almost twofold over-
all increase in industrial and agricultural output, while in many
important branches the increase will be several times greater. In
the field of agriculture we plan an annual output of 164 million to
180 million tons of grain, 76 million to 84 million tons of sugar beet;
not less than 16 million tons of meat, and 100 million to 105 million
tons of milk The Soviet people are confident that we shall not only
reach these targets, but even exceed them. In 1958, already, the
Soviet Union surpassed the United States in over-all output of milk,
especially of butter, and hopes to overtake and to outstrip the United
States in the output of these items per capita within the next few
years. Our country produces more wheat, sugar beet and wool than
the USA. But I do not think this does any harm to the United States
or to the farmers of Iowa.

In the past few years many Americans have visited the Soviet
Union. Leading statesmen and men prominent in public life, Senators
and Congressmen, businessmen', industrialists and farmers have been
to our country. .AH of them enjoyed the hospitality of the Soviet
people and were able to see for themselves that the Soviet people
are a peace-loving people and that they are friendly toward the
American people.

The purpose of our visit to the United States at the invitation
of President Eisenhower is to help improve relations between the
Soviet Union and the United States, and to strengthen peace.

As we know from history, there never have been in the past,
and there are not at present, any territorial disputes between the

158

Soviet Union and the iJnited States standing in the way of good,
friendly relations. It is also known that among the Americans there
are many people who want good relations with our country.

The peoples of the Soviet Union sincerely desire to strengthen
and develop friendly relations with the American people. You know
that in the past there have been many fine examples of friendly
cooperation between our countries. In the Second World War the
Soviet Union and the United States fought together, hand in hand,
against the common enemy who threatened all mankind. And this
speeded up victory and brought the peace whose benefits the nations
enjoy.

The Soviet people want the experience of friendly collaboration
between the peoples of our countries to be strengthened and expand-
ed under present-day conditions in the interest of consolidating peace.

We are in favor of improving Soviet-American relations because
we believe it to be in the interest of both nations. The establishment
of friendly relations between the USA and the USSR would Be an
important step toward strengthening world peace and good relations
among all peoples. The businessmen of your country can play an
important part in improving Soviet-American relations. All mankind
today hopes fervently that the Soviet Union and the United States
will make a big contribution to the solution of the basic problems of
our day, to the consolidation of peace.

If we succeed in improving relations between our countries, if
we succeed in arranging mutually beneficial trade and in further
extending our cultural, sports and other contacts, we shall thereby
make a big contribution to the cause of relieving international ten-
sion, the cause of peaceful coexistence and the strengthening of world
peace. And this will, in turn, have a beneficial influence on the lives
of our peoples and of all mankind.

During our stay in the United States of America we have had
many interesting meetings and conversations with representatives of
various sections of the American people. These meetings and conver-
sations show that the American people do not want war, that they
desire peace. We have heard many warm words addressed to the
Soviet people and many friendly good wishes. We are grateful for
these expressions of good feeling and thank you for them, and for
our part assure you that the Soviet people are awaiting President
Eisenhower's visit to our country and will extend him a fitting
welcome.

1*0 conclude my speech I should once again like to emphasize

159

Photo s&ows N, S. Khrushchev shaking hands with a worker on Garsfs farm.
Khrushchev with children at the Garst farm.

160

the unwavering determination of the Soviet people to uphold the
cause of peace, to improve and develop friendly relations and coop-
eration between our countries, among the peoples of all countries.
This is the purpose of the proposals for general and complete dis-
armament presented by the Soviet Government in the United Nations.
This, too, is the purpose of the Soviet proposal to conclude a peace
treaty with Germany. It is our opinion that these problems are not
insoluble, provided, of course, there is a desire to adjust them. Where
there's a will, there's a way. These problems can be solved because
all the peoples have one object in view the most noble and vitally
important object that of safeguarding peace.

For the sake of achieving this lofty aim all countries must make
an effort and display the maximum desire. The cooperation of all the
countries of the world, and, first and foremost, of our two countries,
is essential to bring about a thaw and to melt the ice of the cold
war once and for all. It's an ill wind that blows nobody any good.
May the winds of peace and friendship blow over the fields, and
may clouds appear in the sky only when a good shower is necessary
for a good harvest.

May the two words, peace and friendship, be inscribed on the
banners of each of our nations and may they guide the conscience
and actions of our governments.

I wish you success in the further development of your excellent
State of Iowa, and health and happiness for you alL

Thank you.

( N. S. Khrushchev's speech was frequently interrupted by
applause.)

N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the
USSR, spent all of September 23 in Iowa, one of the United States'
major agricultural centers.

On the morning of September 23, N. S. Khrushchev and his party
drove from Des Moines to Coon Rapids to inspect the farms of Roswell
Garst, who is well-known in the Soviet Union, and of other farmers.

Giving his impressions of Garst's farm, N. S. Khrushchev said:

Before arriving here I had a picture of Mr. Garst's good farm
from accounts and films. I have known Mr. Garst for several years.
However, it is always better to see than to hear. I am glad that what
I heard about this farm has been confirmed I am happy over your
achievements and I ask you also to rejoice over our achievements.

I must express my profound respect for the inhabitants of the
state of Iowa, both urban dwellers and farmers, whom I met I would

161

hrushchev talking with Amerf-
ns on the Garst farm in Iowa.

especially like to mention the editor of the local Des Moines Register
who several years ago showed foresight and through his paper
advanced the proposal of organizing an exchange of agricultural
delegations between the United States of America and the Soviet
Union.

After inspecting the farms of Garst and Thomas, N. S. Khrushchev
visited Iowa State College in Ames. Bidding the students and the
teaching staff farewell, N. S. Khrushchev said:

Thank you for your cordial welcome. I was very glad to meet
you, and to have even made a cursory acquaintance with your col-
lege. I knew something about it before, from what our comrades who
visited it told us. We have a high opinion of the scientific research
and teaching conducted in your college. I wish you the best of success.
Let us exchange experience. This will be useful for our countries.
Please convey my best wishes to all the students, and may they
succeed in their studies so as to be of good service to their people and
country. Please convey my best wishes to the scientists, the teachers,
the laboratory personnel and all those who are advancing science
and training specialists.

N. S. Khrushchev and his party left by plane for Pittsburgh (Penn-
sylvania) on the evening of September 23. Before leaving Des Moines,
N. S. Khrushchev addressed those seeing him off with a short speech.

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV SPEECH

BEFORE TAKING OFF FROM DES MOINES

MR. GOVERNOR, MR. MAYOR, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I wish to express my gratitude to the Governor of Iowa, the
Mayor of the city and to all the inhabitants of the city and the state
I met I am boundlessly pleased with the hospitality shown me, a
representative of the Soviet state and of the Soviet people. On
leaving I take with me and will convey to the Soviet people the
friendly wishes which I received from the inhabitants of the state of
Iowa.

I once again thank you and wish you happiness and prosperity.

Good-bye.

163

IN PITTSBURGH September 24

N. S. Khrushchev and his party arrived in Pittsburgh at about mid-
night. At the airfield the head of the Soviet Government was met by
representatives of the local authorities and the public.

Mr. Thomas Gallagher, the city's Mayor, presented N". S. Khrush-
chev with a symbolic key to Pittsburgh.

SPEECH EY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV
ON ARRIVING IN PITTSBURGH

MR. MAYOR, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

I am very glad to be in your city. I accepted the invitation
extended by the President of the United States to visit your country
with great satisfaction. I have already sufficiently traveled around,
and I have seen a great deal, heard a lot and have had many
meetings in your country. It is very gratifying that the people of
America have cordially welcomed me and have showed concern that
relations between our countries be improved, that friendly relations
and peace between all peoples be ensured.

Mr, Mayor, I highly value your confidence expressed in the fact
that you presented me with a symbolic key of your city. I thank you
and assure you that I want to be your friend and will never abuse
your trust, and with this key I will only open those doors which you
will allow me to open; I shall not make a single step without your
permission.

I thank you for the good welcome and the kind words. I wish
your city and your people happiness and prosperity.

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV AT A LUNCHEON IN PITTSBURGH

The Governor of Pennsylvania, David Lawrence, the Mayor of
Pittsburgh, Thomas Gallagher, and the President of the University of
Pittsburgh, Edward Litchfield, gave a luncheon in honor of N. S.
Khrushchev, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR.

Answering the greetings of his hosts, N. S. Khrushchev said:

MR. GOVERNOR, MR. MAYOR, MR. CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY,
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FRIENDS:

It is a pleasure to meet you. Perhaps it is because your city, a
city of big industry, brings back vivid memories of the distant past,

164

of my childhood and youth, of my work in the Donets Basin. Per-
haps it is because, in general, I like to meet businessmen, but most
likely I am happy to meet you for both these reasons.

There is a good tradition to begin a speech by expressing
thanks to the audience for their patience. I will not break good
traditions. Allow me to thank you heartily for your warm welcome
and to wish you success in your affairs and in life. Meeting different
people in your city, I got the feeling that contact of some sort had
already been established between us.

We Russians and all Soviet people have long admired American
efficiency, enterprise and the ability to value time. Of course, these
are only a few of the qualities of the Americans.

We Soviet people also have our specific traits revolutionary
scope, courage and initiative. And so, if the efforts of both peoples
were united on some common ground in the struggle for peace and
human progress, for example, the results would be good. (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe you will allow me not to con-
tinue my speech in Russian since the majority of you do not know
the Russian language. I would like to ask my young friend, the inter-
preter, to read the text of the speech in English. That will be shorter.
I am doing this especially because the Chancellor has said that we
have to choose between a long and a short speech. So I choose the
shortest (Laughter, applause.)

Let us translate all of it into the language of business.

Your country has attained a high level of industrial develop-
ment The rapid development of industry in the United States of
America astounded the whole world and aroused admiration and

Turnout to welcome the head of the Soviet government on the roaef to Pittsburgh,

even envy in other countries. Formerly, you did not have a worthy
contestant in rates of development and in strength. Now you have
one the Soviet Union.

Under revolutionary conditions, on a new social basis, we util-
ized everything valuable that you had created, and we proved that
your achievements could not only be equaled but also surpassed

Today we are already catching up with your country in some
things. To put it figuratively, we are now having an exchange of
whistle calls. You hear our whistle getting louder and closer. Each
year it will be heard better and better. And the day is not far
distant when we shall draw level with you at the same station, salute
you and move on. Then it will be we, and not you any long <es , who
are in front And it won't be we who are following you, but you wlio
will be following us*

Don't judge me too severely for my firm conviction that events
will develop in just that way. We are prepared to compete with you
In so lofty a cause as the satisfaction of the material and cultural
requirements of the peoples.

You probably know that the Soviet Union is already the world's
second industrial power. Incidentally, at one time your country was
also second, but then it became the first. And you considered this
to be perfectly natural Why is it then that some of your com-
patriots think it impossible and even impermissible for us to set
ourselves the goal of moving up from second place to first? We are
going to compete with your country in all seriousness. The seven-year
plan for the development of the Soviet economy has aroused con-
siderable interest throughout the world. I don't wish to tire you and
will quote only a few figures.

In 1958 we produced about 55 million tons of steel and in 1965
we intend to produce 86 to 91 million tons.

Last year our output of pig iron was about 40 million tons and
we plan to produce 65 to 70 million tons.

Our output of rolled goods was about 43 million tons and we
plan to produce 65 to 70 million tons in 1965.

I can tell you that, judging by the first of the seven years and
by estimates for 1960, we shall have a greater rise in industrial out-
put than we previously planned. We are, therefore, exceeding the
targets, as we expected, and the seven-year plan will be fulfilled
ahead of schedule.

As you see, we intend to take big strides forward and we are
capable of doing it

166

In a shop of the Mesta Machine-Building Plant in Pittsburgh.

Our country has accumulated valuable experience in developing
industry, science and engineering. For example, we are making a
better use of the effective volume of blast furnaces than you are in
your country. Our steel workers get more steel per square meter of
open-hearth furnace. In our country extensive use is made of oxygen
blast in metallurgy. We are now successfully employing natural gas
in metallurgy.

But how can I enumerate everything? And Fve only touched
on the subject of metallurgy.

Speaking figuratively, in tlje language of engineers, we can
imagine the two giant industrial powers, the USSR and the USA, as
moving along parallel lines. You on your own, and we on our own.
There may be some people who would be satisfied with such a
development of events. Even that sort of parallel and isolated devel-
opment would, of course, be preferable to disputes and conflicts.

But it is also possible to imagine different relations between
our countries. Sometimes, at a certain point, these lines, let us say,
draw close to each other. In other words, contacts are established

167

and economic, cultural, scientific and technical exchanges are ar-
ranged We favor just this development and are prepared to disclose
our technical achievements to you, making no secret of them. And
you will do likewise with respect to our country. In your country,
it is true, such things are not done. Everybody keeps his technical
secrets to himself and does not even want his neighbor to know
them, let alone disclose them to a foreign country.
And so what can we do?

We propose to approach the matter simply, on the basis of
mutual benefit

Although our peoples live differently, maintain a different way
of life and have different customs, we have to live under the same
sky. Although the climate in your country is much warmer and
milder than in ours, the political chill comes from you and not from
us. It is true, we are Northerners and not afraid of the cold, but
still we would like wanner, more favorable winds, and not cold winds,
to blow in the world.

Neither your people nor ours want war. Then let us live like
good neighbors or, as we say in Russia, "To live with the people is
to live in peace/* Let us base our relations on the principle of peace-
ful coexistence. It gives nobody a one-sided advantage, nobody suffers
losses from it, nobody makes any sacrifices, but everybody gains
from it. And, most important of all, the cause of peace gains from it
A good start has been made visits are being exchanged on
both sides at the highest level. My visit to the USA and the U.S.
President's forthcoming visit to the Soviet Union will, we are sure,
help us to know and understand each other better, and will help find
a way to cooperation. If both our sides have the will for this, a way
will be found.

The slogan "Overtake and surpass the United States" has be-
come very popular in our country today. Some of your compatriots
were frightened by this slogan. They saw in it a danger to America
But in what way is it a "danger" to you Americans? Our economic
interests do not clash anywhere. Is not our country, engaged in such
extensive peaceful construction, interested in a dependable and
durable peace, in the development of comprehensive economic,
technical and commercial relations with other countries? Certainly
it is.

Could not the highly-developed industrial countries give sub-
stantial and constantly increasing aid to the economically under-
developed countries?

168

I want to assure you that the purpose of our seven-year plan is
a peaceful one Our plan is calculated to improve the people's life.
Unfortunately, we live in times when not all the steel produced is
used for peaceful purposes. How happy the peoples of our countries
and the peoples of the whole world would be if all the steel smelted
in America, and here in Pittsburgh in particular, and all the steel in
the Soviet Union and other countries, were used exclusively for
peaceful purposes! (Applause.)

I think you will agree with me when I say that even if we had
two lives they should be dedicated to this one great and worthy
cause the consolidation of peace between the peoples. (Applause.)

There is a distinguished sculptor in our country, Yevgeny
Vuchetich. He has made a moving statue, called "Let's Beat Swords
into Plowshares.** It is a fine piece of work that deservedly attracts
everyone's attention. It represents the figure of a blacksmith ham-
mering a plowshare out of a sword. If any of you visited our exhibi-
tion in New York, you must have seen that gifted work of art The
sculptor has succeeded in embodying in bronze what millions upon
millions of people are thinking and dreaming of today.

Is it not time, ladies and gentlemen, to use open-hearth fur-
naces to melt down the stockpiles of weapons, is it not time to beat
tanks into tractors and guns into threshers, and to direct the entire
might of the atom to peaceful purposes only?

As far as the Soviet Union is concerned, as I have already said
at the United Nations, we are ready to do it this very day.

You and we are living in a rather complicated world situation,
although at times there are bright patches in the overcast sky. Are
these present days not one of them? It is not for nothing that the
state of world affairs in recent years has been given the name of
"cold war." Under conditions of tension the cold war can easily turn
into a hot one, into a very hot one indeed, a nuclear war, that will
not only scorch but will burn to ashes.

The surest way of avoiding such unenviable prospects is to
destroy the means of waging war, that is, "to beat swords into plow-
shares. 1 ' We propose that cold war be outlawed everywhere and for
all time

There are, of course, people who are interested in the very
opposite. They are afraid that if there are no war orders, peaceful
production will not bring in profits. They fear that if the output of
weapons ceases and there is a change over to peaceful production,
industry and the entire economy will be kept in a perpetually fever-

169

ish state. But this mood springs from sheer lack of foresight Such
people live by the principle of not looking farther than their noses.
Indeed, if the weapons being manufactured today are ever used, the
flames of war will consume not only the profits amassed on arma-
ments production, but also very many of their owners.

I would like you to understand me correctly. I do not want to
reproach anybody. I am merely trying to lay stress on the idea that
wealth is of use only so long as it is not turned into ashes and cinders.

It is no secret that a special responsibility for the maintenance
of peace rests with our two countries. Just imagine what world rela-
tions would look like if the USA, the largest and most powerful coun-
try of the capitalist world, and the USSR, the largest and most
powerful country of the socialist world, were to establish good rela-
tions or, still better, collaboration, which we should like to grow
into friendship.

I agree with Mr. Eisenhower, who once wrote that "no other
division among the nations could be considered a menace to world
unity and peace, provided mutual confidence and trust could be
developed between America and the Soviet Union."

Those words were written shortly after the Second World War,

Khrushchev talking with executives of the Mesta Machine-Building Plant in Pittsburgh.

in which he had played so outstanding a part. Today Mr. Eisenhower
is President of the United States of America. Why not realize those
good ideas? We, on our part, are prepared to do everything to ensure
mutual trust between America and the Soviet Union, and in this way
help guarantee peace on earth for all peoples.

There are no serious obstacles to our two countries living in
peace and friendship. There are, of course, ideological differences
between our countries, but they are not an obstacle, for these differ-
ences existed during the Second World War but did not prevent our
being good friends. Nor should they today prevent us from joining
forces in the struggle for durable peace on earth. We are glad that
here, too, in the USA, people who think realistically are inclined to
adopt the same idea. The more people of that kind there are, the
better it will be.

We must get to understand each other properly. We do not beg
for peace. We only believe that peace, not war, is the natural state
of mankind.

In connection with my trip to the USA, there appeared in some
countries various conjectures about the purposes of the exchange of
visits between representatives of our countries. Some even thought
that Khrushchev was "going to divide up the world with Eisenhower."

I must state that such gossip is groundless and nonsensical
People who think along these lines take a gangster's view of all
events. They have their own way of thinking: "If youVe strong,
grab everything you can." We, however, are people with entirely
different principles. Our strength serves only the welfare of our peo-
ple and of other peoples. We use our strength to ensure peace and
universal security. It serves no other purpose.

The exchange of visits and our conversations on problems of
the world situation and Soviet-American relations are useful not only
to our countries but also to all other countries. The settlement by the
Soviet Union and the United States of America of even a few dis-
puted problems is bound to have a beneficial effect on the entire
world situation and on the relations between our countries and all
other countries, large and small.

Now I should like to share the impressions I gained today dur-
ing my visit to the Mesta Machine Company's plant in West Home-
stead where we met the management, the office staff and workers.
These were excellent meetings. On the way to the plant and back we
were to some extent able to make contact with the inhabitants of
Pittsburgh, even if at some distance. It was a pleasure to respond

171

to the friendly greetings of the many thousands of people lining
the streets.

Allow me to express my sincere thanks to the Vice-President
of the Machine Company, Mr. Frank Mesta, who received us so
kindly at .the plant Through him I would like to thank all the
workers, engineers, technicians and other employees, who were very
friendly to us during our visit to the plant

We have gained a very fine impression of Pittsburgh and its
people But our visit here is coming to an end, and Mr. Lodge, if I
may say so, must be glad: At last that "burdensome** job that has
fallen to his lot the job of accompanying me on my trip across
America is coming to an end. (Animation.)

LODGE: It has been a pleasure for me.

KHRUSHCHEV: Thank you. In a few days you will probably say:
"Well, my dear guest, I have great pleasure at last in saying good-bye
to you." (Laughter.)

(Lodge smiles and waves his hand in protest.)

KHRUSHCHEV: And what's wrong with that? Don't you want to
give me a good send-off ? (Laughter.) Or do you want to give me a
bad send-off? (Laughter.)

LODGE: You have been a good guest I regret that your trip to
the USA is coming to an end.

KHRUSHCHEV: Thank you. I can tell you that when you come
to us in the Soviet Union you will see that we are not only good
guests but good hosts as well. (Animation, applause.)

We are very pleased with the attitude of the people of your fine
city toward us Soviet people, with their warmth and cordiality, and
chicly with their appreciation of the significance of my visit to the
USA, with their understanding of the necessity of improving rela-
tions between our states.

Allow me to express my sincere thanks to Bishop John Wright
who, as Mr. Lodge informed me, appealed to his congregation to
meet me and my party in a manner befitting good hosts in order
to create conditions for an improvement in the relations between our
countries.

I also render my sincere thanks to the Bishop who read a
prayer before the beginning of our lunch here today. In his prayer, as
translated to me, he prayed that our relations might improve, that
there might be peace among people, between our countries and among
all nations.

I can tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that all people in our coun-

172

try, atheists and religious people alike, the priesthood of all religions
(and in our country there are many peoples and many different
religions) that they all have one thought, irrespective of their re-
ligious convictions or the color of their skin, that all Soviet people
want peace and are doing their best to ensure peace between the
nations, peace throughout the world Our priests, mullahs and rabbis,
like your bishops and clergy, pray to God that there may be peace
on earth and friendship among the peoples. (Applause.)

I should like to assure you it is easy for me to speak to you
because many of those present have visited the Soviet Union and
have some idea of our state and of our people and their hospitality
that we love our country and our state just as you love your country.
Our people love their families, their children, just as you do yours.
As we traveled through your towns and communities we saw many
fine youngsters. Come and visit us, our successes in that field are
no less (animation) than in the development of industry. Our people
are just as fond of their children, their wives and their parents, and
are solicitous of their well-being. (Applause.)

Your country is rich and you have achieved a high standard of
living. When you were exhorted to pray for the liberation of the
"slaves of communism," I said by way of a joke to Vice-President
Nixon when we met in Moscow:

"Take a look at how the *slaves of communism* live, talk to
them and ask them whether they have anything to complain of."

And now that I am your guest I should like to repeat that
joke don't judge me too seriously I have come here to see how the
slaves of capitalism live. And I must say that you do not live badly.
And neither do we; we live well and we are going to live still better.
We shall stand up for ourselves and for our country, and are sure
that we are going to catch up with you and outstrip you. We do not
want to increase our wealth and catch up with you by using methods
of piracy such as were used in the past pirates never created any-
thing, they only plundered what other peoples had created. We want
to overtake and outstrip you by applying our own physical and
spiritual efforts in order to create more material values than you
create. I repeat, we are confident that we shall catch up with you
and outstrip you. And we warn you, like honest contestants, pull up
your socks or you may find yourselves behind us. We say that our
riches will never be used to the detriment of any nation. In the
interests of peace we must march in step with you, in step with all
nations. (Stormy applause.)

173

Speaking with workers at the Mesta Machine-Bwlding Plant in Pittsburgh.

You, ladies and gentlemen, like your capitalist system. We a
very fond of the socialist system which our people have built u
You say that your system is better. Well, stick to your opinion un1
you are convinced of the opposite. We tell you sincerely that tl
socialist system is better. It provides better conditions for the devt
opment of the productive forces and, consequently, can do mo
for the progress of economy and culture. So far you do not adnc
this, although the advantages of socialism have been very well der
onstrated by the example of the Soviet Union and other countric
Different views on the social system must not prevent us from c
operating. You like capitalism so have it your own way live und
capitalism, continue riding your old horse. We are mounted on
new, fresh, socialist steed, and it will be easier for us to overtal
and outstrip you. But this is a question of the economic competiti<
between the two systems. If we take the path of peaceful compe
tion, it will be to the advantage of all nations, because there will be 3

174

wars between states and human blood will not be spilled. (Appl

Allow me to thank all those who have spoken here, the Go\
Mr. Lawrence, Mr. Lodge and Mr. Litchfield, the Chancellor
University, who is in the chair. I can subscribe to all the sp<
made here today, yet there is something I should like to clarii
one point I should like to raise about the Governor's speech -
in general, I liked. All the speeches were well conceived an
speech of the Governor, especially the closing part of it, was
aptly, I might say even very cleverly, constructed. I envy yoi
Governor, as one speaker envies another. (Laughter, applause

At the end of your speech, Mr. Governor, you said thai
people are united in their support of the government's policj
the Republican and Democratic Parties of the USA display cor
unity in defense and support of your system and your state, tha
support the President and his foreign policy.

Such a statement could have two meanings. I want to sai
in my opinion, that speech may be interpreted. One meaning
be: **Listen here, Khrushchev! (Laughter.) We have two partw
we are one."

God knows what difference there is between your par
wonder if you know; I'm sure I don't. (Laughter, applause.) 1
it more precisely, I don't see any difference between them. B
Governor's speech might also contain a hint of this sort: "Torn
Khrushchev, you're going to talk with our President We tc
President: *Be steadfast! Stand firm! We are behind you.*"

To this I can reply: "Ask your Ambassador, Mr. Thor
and Mrs. Thompson." Mr. Thompson has represented your c<
in Moscow for several years, and if I'm not telling the truth, I<
correct me. Our Soviet people are united, they are rallied i
around their Communist Party, they support their own Party,
they believe to be the best party in the world. Our one Comi
Party is better than your two parties. (ArdmatiorL) That's mj
ion. What do you expect me to say? That your parties are bet
I thought so, I'd join one of them. (Laughter.)

Our people support their Soviet Government. Before I 1
the USA many people said to me what you say to your Pres
"Comrade Khrushchev, go to America, try to achieve peac
friendship with the American people and the American Goven
but stand firm." (Animation*)

If we adopt this over-simplified approach and take up ad
positions I, mine, and the U.S. President, his there won't 1

businesslike talks tomorrow. There would be no negotiations to
find reasonable solutions, but sheer stubborness that, to put it figura-
tively, would be like the stubbornness of two bulls which has the
stronger legs, which has the harder forehead, which has the longer
horns and which can first gore the other.

But is that what the peoples of the Soviet Union and the United
States, the peoples of all countries, expect of us? You have strong legs,
but ours don't bend either. So let's compete in solving disputed ques-
tions by reason and not by force. That is what all the peoples expect
of us. (Applause.)

It is a pleasure for me to negotiate with a head of state who
enjoys the support, respect and love of his people. (Applause.) I
represent our Soviet people. I am grateful for the confidence and
respect the Soviet people have for their Government and for me as
the head of the Soviet Government, representing the Soviet Union,
the great Soviet people, in your country.

In these circumstances it will be easier for us to seek mutually
acceptable solutions, that is, solutions acceptable to both our peoples.
If a* 'people are not united and do not support the head of their
state, then that head of state cannot make sensible decisions. He
would always be looking first one way and then the other, first at
the Democrats, say, and then at the Republicans, and then at nobody
knows whom; for he is never quite sure whether they will support
his position or not

So I should like to interpret your statement, Mr. Governor, as
a real mandate of the Americans' confidence in and love for their
President, as a wish that he, in his negotiations and conversations
with me should find reasonable arguments, that by our joint efforts, we
should find mutually accepted solutions that would really guarantee
mutual understanding and friendly relations between our states and
a sound peace between us and among all countries.

I came to the USA with the confidence of my people and of my
government. And that is what will guide me during my meetings
and talks with your esteemed President, Mr. Dwight D. Eisenhower.

If our two countries establish relations of trust instead of mis-
trust, and pool their efforts in the struggle to consolidate peace for
themselves and for everybody, the peoples of the whole world will
support us.

Thank you. (Prolonged applause. All rise.)

N. S. Khrushchev and his party left by plane from Pittsburgh to
Washington at 4:38 P.M., local time.

176

IN WASHINGTON September 24-27

On September 24, N. S. Khrushchev and his party returned to
Washington.

Following are N. S. Khrushchev's speeches and talks in the U.S.
capital September 24-27.

MEETING WftH A GROUP OF REPRESENTATIVES
OF THE U.S. BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL WORLD

In Washington on September 24, Mr. Eric Ridder, publisher
of The Journal of Commerce, gave a dinner for N. S. Khrushchev,
which was attended by representatives of the U.S. business and
commercial world. The Press Group with the Chairman of the
Council of Ministers of the USSR published the text of the talk
held during the dinner.

In his opening remarks Mr. Ridder greeted N. S. Khrushchev
and thanked him for consenting to meet a small circle of business-
men in order to exchange views on some important questions, includ-
ing the question of Soviet-American trade. Mr. Ridder noted that
in March, 1958, when he was received by N. S. Khrushchev in
Moscow, he had asked him many questions and had been given
comprehensive replies. Such an opportunity had now arisen for his
colleagues. He was confident, he said, that N. S. Khrushchev would
be asked many questions and that, in turn, he could ask American
businessmen a series of questions.

QUESTION: Do you think, Mr. Chairman, that your trip to the
USA will help to promote Soviet-American trade?

KHRUSHCHEV: Yes, I expect it will, but I should imagine that
American businessmen could answer that question better than L

REDDER: I would ask my guests to give their points of view on
this remark of Prime Minister Khrushchev.

PHILIP CORTNEY (President of Republic Steel Corporation) : I
don't see how Mr. Khrushchev's trip will help Soviet-American trade.

RIDDER: I hold a different view and believe that an improve-
ment of political relations will help to promote business relations
between bur countries.

177

CHARLES WHITE (President of Republic Steel Corporation):
Trade with the USSR is nothing new to us. We used to sell sheet
steel to the Soviet Union. The Union Carbide and Carbon Corpora-
tion used to buy ore from Soviet organizations. We have been work-
ing with the Russians for 30 years. I want to say that today Russians
are producing many of the goods we are making in the USA and
that this fencing-off of markets has caused difficulties in trade. I have
a good knowledge of the situation in the USA and of our American
problems. We have frequent conflicts between management and labor.
Communists are mixed up in all these conflicts. They add fuel to
them and in that way make it difficult to adjust relations with the
USSR.

JACK STRAUS (President of R. H. Macy and Company) : An-
other difficulty is that the American consumer does not waflt to buy
goods coming from behind the "Iron Curtain."

w. T. MOORE (President of the Moore-McCormack Lines): We
have been working with the Russians since 1928. We carried large
shipments of freight from the USSR to the USA and from the USA
to the USSR, and are doing so to some extent today. We know the
Russians well. Our business relations with them have always been
good. We believe that business relations will improve with the im-
provement of political relations, because trade always develops
together with friendship.

I cannot agree that Americans are refusing to buy goods coming
from the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries. For instance,
we transport ham from Poland to the U.S., and various goods from
Czechoslovakia. I do not know how they are being sold in the USA
(we are not associated with that), but I do know that their sales
are increasing all the time. For example, the import of Polish ham
to the U.S. has, I think, tripled lately. We also bring Soviet goods,
caviar among them, and I would like to see more of that in the
U.S. (Laughter.)

CORTNEY: In the interview with Eric Ridder, Mr. Khrushchev
said that Russia wanted to buy all the goods she needed and to sell
those she had. But an exchange of goods and payments is always
made by means of gold. Regrettably, the Soviet Union does not
publish data about its gold output and gold reserves. That worries
us, because all other countries supply this information. The lack of
such information with respect to the USSR undermines trust and
worries us.

178

KHRUSHCHEV: I have listened attentively to your questions,
gentlemen, and have not interrupted you. But I cannot understand
to what extent and why commercial circles in the U.SA are worried
and anxious over the fact that we do not publish data about gold
reserves. In general, I cannot understand what gold has to do with
it I must tell you that we do not value gold very highly. I could
cite what V. I Lenin said about gold, but I do not think it would be
the suitable thing to say at dinner. (Laughter.)

LODGE (the US. President's persona! representative with N. S.
Khrushchev): I am a small capitalist and I have no gold at all.

KHRUSHCHEV: But I have. Here it is (N. S. Khrushchev points
to two gold Hero of Socialist Labor medals), but it does not belong
to me. When I die it will be turned over to the state.

REMARK: You mean your family won't be able to make use of
this gold?

KHRUSHCHEV: It won't. But as regards gold and foreign trade,
you can ask all the people with whom we have had dealings and
they will tell you that we are always punctual in our payments and
have never been in debt. Now, as regards the question asked earlier,
When you enter a shop to make a purchase, is it customary in

Khrushchev at the experimental station of the Department ot Agriculture in Beltsvilh (Maryland),

your country to ask when some item or other was made and who
made it?

I myself bought a hat in one of your shops because I gave
mine away to a longshoreman in San Francisco. Now then, when I
bought this hat I did not ask who had made it and showed no interest
in the shopkeeper's political views. I did not know that, when making
purchases in your country, one is expected to ask who made the item
concerned, who is the father of the shopkeeper, who is his wife and
what their names are. That makes commerce very complicated.
(Animation. Cries of "Quite right!")

REMARK : But under our laws it is important where the goods come
from. For instance, there was a time when German goods were banned.
KHRUSHCHEV: My good tradesman, you are making a hash of
everything trade, economics and politics. You speak of things that
have nothing to do at all with any of the laws of political economy.
When you could not buy German goods, you were at war with Ger-
many. But we are not, after all, at war with you! I am sure that if
shops selling Soviet goods are opened, your people will buy those
goods with pleasure. I know that you have no liking for the Russian
Revolution, as you call the Great October Socialist Revolution, but
you do like Russian caviar, for instance, and I have noticed that you
are ready to consume it in fairly large quantities. (Laughter.)

STRAUS; But would you let Mac/s open a store on a reciprocal
basis?

KHRUSHCHEV: Now that is put in a businesslike way. We are
willing to negotiate. But are you, gentlemen? (Animation.) You must,
rf course, understand that I am speaking of goods and not of shops.
American businessmen can organize the sale of our goods themselves
and extract a profit from it. The only trouble is that many of our
goods cannot be imported into the USA at present because the duties
MI them are exorbitantly high.

MIKHAIL A. MENSHIKOV (Soviet Ambassador to the USA): The
luty on some Soviet goods is three, four and more times higher than
:hat on the same goods from other countries. The duty on vodka, for
example, is four times higher.

KHRUSHCHEV: I want to make one thing clear. I did not come
lere to sell you goods that found no market Besides, we don't have
roods of that kind in our country. We produce a lot and sell quickly.
3ur warehouses are not crammed with stale goods. Goods make the
rath from industry to shop and consumer in double-quick time. If
rou don't want to trade with us, you don't have to. We'll wait until

180

you yourself come knocking at our door. Let me repeat, we'll wait
The wind isn't blowing in our faces. Go ahead, sit by the shore and
wait for fair weather. (Animation.) We are doing excellent business
with China and other socialist countries. We are making good prog-
ress in our trade with India, Britain, France, West Germany and
Italy. Our affairs are in good shape. Our economy is expanding at a
rate which is two or three times faster than yours. We offer thanks
to God, so to say, and go ahead with our good work. (Animation,
applause.)

G. B. MILLER (President of Allied Chemical and Dye Corporation) :
I think that better relations between our countries and greater con-
tacts between the peoples will enable us to improve economic
relations as well.

KHRUSHCHEV: Quite right I think so, too. That, is why I said
that improved political relations will most certainly bring about an
improvement in trade relations as well The important thing is that
you should understand that we have not come to stretch a long hand
into your pocket We keep our hands in our own pockets. (Laughter.)
Even if you keep your pocket open, 111 pass by and not so much as
glance at what you have in it (Laughter, applause.)

The present bad trade relations between our countries are not
an economic but a political factor. You did not recognize the Soviet
Union for 16 years, but you traded with us. (Animation.) Now you
recognize us, but do not trade. How much longer will this continue,
16 years or more, I cannot tell That is your affair, reflect on it and
decide for yourselves.

R, T. REED (American Express Company): Greater contact be-
tween the business people of our countries would go a long way
toward increasing trade. There has lately been an increase in tourist
travel between the USA and the USSR. It appears to be useful

KHRUSHCHEV: I consider it a step in the right direction. We
' support such contacts and will do our utmost to broaden them.

REED: The Soviet side had agreed to let American firms open
their offices in the USSR to promote tourism. But nothing has yet
been done about it. I realize that that is only a detail, but I should
like to bring to your notice that such a question exists.

KHRUSHCHEV: I shall bear your remark in mind

REED: Would you say that trade between our countries would
be more successful if we had a trade agreement?

KHRUSHCHEV: Why not? In general, why can we trade with
others Krupp, for example and not with you?

181

CORTNEY: All the same, there are many difficulties in Western
trade with the USSR. One of these is the monopoly on foreign trade.

KHRUSHCHEV: You are again mixing trade up with politics. The
question of monopoly on foreign trade was resolved in our country
42 years ago and is not subject to revision. If it is difficult to trade
with us, you don't have to. Do business with those with whom it is
easy for you, but the system in our country will remain unchanged.

CORTNEY: But both you and we want to trade.

KHRUSHCHEV: Well, we did have considerable trade with many
American firms. With Ford, for example. And it was profitable both
for Ford and for us.

CORTNEY: Perhaps it was profitable for Ford but not for Amer-
ica? (Animation.)

KHRUSHCHEV: But the American business world is made up of
Fords! (Laughter.)

RIDDER: Would you, Mr. Khrushchev, tell us of the impressions
of your tour of the USA?

KHRUSHCHEV: I am pleased with my U.S. tour. The Americans
are a peaceful people and, like all nations of the world, they do not
want war. In saying so, I emphasize again that I do not divide the
American people into business and political circles. Nor do I make
any distinction between them and the government. Businessmen are,
possibly, more inclined toward a peaceful development of events.
But I do not want to dig into souls. That is a difficult thing to do.
It is also possible that some businessmen, those who have large war
orders, are not inclined toward a peaceful development of events.
But that is only my assumption, I may be wrong.

You have many politicians who are afraid that the cold war
might end. They have made too many speeches connected with the
cold war. They have galloped into Congress on the cold war hobby-
horse and want to stay in the same saddle. (Laughter.) But that is
also an assumption and I cannot say exactly how many people of
that kind you have.

I want to speak frankly, just as I shall report on the trip to my
government It seems to me that the American people want to come
to an agreement and live in peace. But apparently it will take some
time before we build up complete trust in our relations. (Remark of
"Thafs right!")

Now a few words about trade. I have already said at the Eco-
nomic Club that our economy suffers nothing from the fact that trade
is not developing between the USA and the USSR. But if there were

182

Photo shows N. S. Khrushchev chatting with journalists
after his visit to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington.

trade, it would be better both for you and for us. (Animation. Voices:
"That is reasonable") Everybody knows that trade utilizes the ben-
efits of the international division of labor, the benefits of specialization
in industry. We would not be developing the manufacture of many
kinds of machines in our country, but would be buying them from
you. But since there is no trade we are compelled to develop our
own manufacture of such machines, and are doing so successfully.
Today, for example, I was told at your Mesta Machines Company
plant that the most powerful press made in the USA has a capacity
of 50,000 tons, but we have made a 70,000-ton press.

If we do not have something, we will make it ourselves. Some
of our machines are better than yours and we are selling them to you.
For example, you have bought a license for a turbodrill for the oil
industry. But we would also buy machines from you. We would be
willing, for example, to buy chemical equipment, because you have
moved ahead in that We could make it ourselves, but that woulo\

183

take some time. For that reason, we are ready to buy that equipment
from you and to pay for it in the way established by international
practice. We would purchase equipment for the oil-refining industry.

In the past we have had dealings with Du Pont We are ready
to deal with the company today as well, if there are no State Depart-
ment bans on this. But if you won't sell us equipment for the oil-
refining industry, we shall make it ourselves and fulfill our plans
fulfill them ahead of schedule.

I must tell you that we buy chemical equipment in other coun-
tries and it is better than yours. Last year we bought two chemical
plants from Krupp. The Americans have also bought a similar plant
from the Germans. We bought an automobile tire factory in Britain.
The equipment for it has already arrived in the Dnepropetrovsk
Economic Area and it is already being installed. We were told that
in this field the British have outstripped you Americans.

N. A. TIKHONOV (Chairman, Dnepropetrovsk Area Economic
Council) : The USA does not have such improved technology for the
production of tires.

KHRUSHCHEV: After signing a trade agreement with Britain
we concluded many deals with British firms. Italy is prominent in
the manufacture of equipment for the production of artificial fiber.
We are buying this equipment there and also in France. In short,
all your allies are selling us what we want, and we are buying it.
America is the only country that does not trade with us. Very well,
we have a saying that if you sulk and don't eat your kasha you'll
gain nothing by it. (Animation.) Please, don't eat our Russian kasha.
That is your business. Perhaps our kasha is bad for your stomachs.
(Laughter.) If that is so, we will not be offended. If it is profitable
sell, if it isn't don't sell; if it is profitable buy, if it isn't don't buy.
Such are the laws of trade. (Applause.)

I see that Americans fear communism as much as the rabbit
fears the boa constrictor, and are losing their common sense. Very
well, we'll wait until you recover your senses completely and begin
to trade. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Why, in spite of all this, do you adopt a lot of what
there is in the capitalist countries?

KHRUSHCHEV: Because we are not fools! (Laughter, applause.)
Why should we turn our backs on useful experience? You have set
many examples in organizing production. Ford, for instance, started
line production. We have adopted that method and are developing
it for the better.

184

QUESTION: We are interested in trading with you. But why are
Soviet organizations buying only sample machines?

KHRUSHCHEV: 111 tell you frankly. If John Deere wants to sell
us tractors and agricultural machines, that is not realistic, because
we are making our own agricultural machines. We are buying and
can buy, say, ten or a hundred tractors and other agricultural ma-
chines. That is done to compare them with our machines, to see
which are better. But why are you displeased with that? How many
tractors or combines do you sell to a farmer? Would Garst buy a
thousand tractors from you? I should think that not a single farmer
would buy even as many as ten machines. He'll buy one or two, but
we'll buy 10 or 100. The argument about samples is unrealistic. Ill
tell you frankly that in the sense of purchases we are not interested
in tractors, combines, aircraft or rockets. (Laughter.) We are inter-
ested in chemical equipment, in equipment for engineering works
and oil refineries. (Animation.) We can sell you tractors ourselves,
gentlemen. If you like we can even sell you one tractor. (Animaticpi.)

RIDDER: Mr. Khrushchev, you have raised the question of
credits. What is your attitude now?

KHRUSHCHEV: We are not asking for credits. But if American
manufacturers want to get big orders from us, they will get them,
provided they give us credits. I have in mind credits from firms, such
as the English have given us. As regards government credits, these
are evidently impossible with the present state of relations between
countries. If credits are forthcoming from firms, we shall pay a
reasonable interest But I stress, a reasonable interest. We shall not
agree to a high interest

MILLER: What is a reasonable interest?

KHRUSHCHEV: Not more than you get from others the interest
that operates in the world market We are not in a position where
we have to ask for credits to help us out You are businessmen and
can see for yourselves how fast we are advancing. Overfulfillment of
our economic plan, by one per cent amounts to 11 billion rubles. This
year we are over-fulfilling the plan by five per cent This means that
at the end of the year we shall have an additional 50 billion rubles.
At the close of the seven-year plan period, one per cent will amount
to 19 billion rubles. I say this to illustrate the fact that we have
drawn up a realistic plan. I have even received a letter from an
American economist who declared that Soviet economists had calcu-
lated the seven-year steel target incorrectly. Our target is 91 million

185

tons, while according to his calculations we shall be producing 104-
105 million tons.

F. PACE: I make movie cameras. I have been told that your
cameras are bad. If we taught you to make cameras, would we get
paid for it? As you know, we make cameras better than most people,
including the Germans.

KHRUSHCHEV: If we got a license from you, the Soviet Union
would pay for it in accordance with international practice. But I
cannot agree that you make better cameras than others, including
the Germans. Our cameras are also good

WHITE: For normal economic relations to develop between us
there must be trust, but there is no trust because the American
Communists try to create all sorts of conflicts between management
and labor.

KHRUSHCHEV: I can be of no help to you there, my dear sir.
You know so little about our system that it is difficult for me to tell
you why. Is it that you want me to tell your Communists not to do
what they are doing?

WHITE: Yes.

KHRUSHCHEV: If we told your Communists that, their reply
would be: "Keep your nose out of other people's affairs."

We would tell the American Communists the same thing if they
interfered in our affairs.

REDDER: Mr. Chairman, you have seen the American people and
you have recognized that they are a peace-loving people. Did you
have the same view before, and do you believe that the American
Government is just as peacefully inclined?

KHRUSHCHEV: My tour of the United States has not changed
my convictions. I have always regarded the Americans as a peaceful
people. As regards an appraisal of the actions of the American
Government, that depends on concrete conditions. We must not judge
by words but by deeds. We have submitted the question of disarma-
ment But if you only say that you are for peace and at the same
time have military bases around the USSR, then we'll also be forced
to have rocket bases against you. We have submitted a proposal for
a peace treaty with Germany. If you sign it, that means you want
peace; if you don't, that means you are steering a course towards
worsening relations. We want to live in peace and to trade with you.
Trade is litmus paper it shows the state of relations between states.
It shows whether they want to live in peace or not You do not want
to trade with us. But why? That makes us think and puts us on our

186

guard Apparently you are planning some evil. You cannot expect
me to tell my people that you are for peace, but do not even want
to trade in such a trifling item as herring. If I did that, the Soviet
people would tell me that I am a simpleton and that evidently they
need another Prime Minister. But I shall not tell the Soviet people
that

If you do not want to trade tfith us, you don't have to, but end
discrimination. So long as there is discrimination we shall have a
thorn in our hearts. But if we find a common language on questions
of disarmament, and if we have a peace treaty with the two German
states, that would mean that you want to live in peace. If not that
means you want war. Everything consists of concrete deeds. If you,
gentlemen, think that our economy will buckle under the arms race
you are imposing on us, you are making a big mistake. In our plans
for peaceful economic development we have also made provisions for
the manufacture of the armaments necessary to defend the interests
of the Soviet Union. We want peace, but we are ready to defend
ourselves against any aggression.

That is what I wanted to tell you, gentlemen, in reply to your
questions. Thank you.

Eric Ridder, who presided, in turn thanked N. S. Khrushchev for the frank
and useful talk. Ridder's guests warmly took leave of N. S. Khrushchev and
wished him success in his struggle for improving the relations between the United
States of America and the Soviet Union and among all countries of the world.

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV AT LUNCHEON

GIVEN BY U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTIAN HERTER

On September 25 the Secretary of State of the United States
Christian A. Herter gave a luncheon in honor of N. S. Khrushchev,
Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR.

Mr. Herter proposed a toast to the Chairman of the Council of
Ministers of the USSR and to the people of the Soviet Union. N. S.
Khrushchev returned the toast:

MR SECRETARY OF STATE, GENTLEMEN, FRIENDS:

I was very glad to hear Mr. Herter*s friendly words. I fully
agree with all he said On my own behalf and on behalf of my
comrades, I must with all sincerity say that we are very pleased with
the President's invitation to visit your country, are very pleased with
our stay here and with the meetings which we had in your country.

187

I must say that nothing unforeseen happened, in our opinion,
during this trip. You think that when we object to what we do not
agree with, we thus express our dissatisfaction. No, we simply express
our disagreement with the point of view of others, and this is quite
normal.

I understand your train of thought; you have a poor knowledge
of our system. We have no less and perhaps even more differences
and disputes over practical questions than you have. But your system
operates in such a way that differences are presented in a more
dramatic and sensational light

When differences arise in considering various questions, we
discuss matters in a calm atmosphere. Indeed, people who do not
agree with one or another draft which is under review proceed, in
the final analysis, from the same considerations which guide the
authors of the draft That is why we have arguments but no sensa-
tions arise.

Of course, we sometimes also have differences on essential
problems which end rather dramatically. I shall not cite any concrete

Secretary of State Christian A. Herter shakes hands with his luncheon guest,
Soviet Premier Khrushchev, as the latter arrives at Anderson House in
Washington. In center is Khrushchev's interpreter, Oleg Troyanovsky.

examples all present here know what I have in mind However, all
this should not prevent us from improving relations between our
countries. An agreement which would correspond to the interests of
both countries can and should be found, if there is a desire to do so.

At present I would like to say, and I am pleased to do this in
such good company, Mr. Herter, that the meetings with the Amer-
ican people have confirmed that we acted correctly in having ac-
cepted the President's invitation, and that they have filled us with a
hope that this trip to the United States will yield useful results.

We, on our part, shall do everything so that the talks with the
President, which we start today, may produce beneficial results. We
shall do everything on our part so that, following these talks, the rela-
tions between our countries may become better than previously.

On returning home, I shall report to our people on the results
of the talks, and I am certain that our people will understand us and
approve the strivings which guided us in the talks here, that a gradu-
al improvement of relations between the USSR and the USA will
lead to friendship between our countries in the interests of strength-
ening the cause of peace.

Allow me to propose a toast to the health of President Dwight
Eisenhower of the USA, to the American people, to our host, Mr.
Herter, who received us so kindly, to all present (Applause.)

JOINT SOVIET-AMERICAN COMMUNIQUE

The Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, N. S.
Khrushchev, and President Eisenhower have had a frank exchange
of opinions at Camp David. In some of these conversations, Minister
of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, A. A. Gromyko and United States
Secretary of State Christian Herter, as well as other officials from
both countries, participated.

The Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and
the President have agreed that these discussions have been useful in
clarifying each other's position on a number of subjects. The talks
were not undertaken to negotiate issues. It is hoped, however, that
the exchange of views will contribute to a better understanding of
the motives and position of each, and thus to the achievement of a
just and lasting peace.

The Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and
the President of the United States agreed that the question of general
disarmament is the most important one facing the world today. Both

189

governments will make every effort to achieve a constructive solution
to this problem.

In the course of the conversations, an exchange of views took
place on the question of Germany, including the question of a peace
treaty with Germany, in which the positions of both sides were
expounded.

With respect to the Berlin question, an understanding was
reached, subject to the approval of the other parties directly con-
cerned, that negotiations would be reopened with a view to achieving
a solution which would be in accordance with the interests of all
concerned and in the interests of the maintenance of peace.

In addition to these matters, useful conversations were held on
a number of questions affecting the relations between the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States. These subjects
included the question of trade between the two countries. With re-
spect to an increase in exchanges of persons and ideas, substantial
progress was made in discussions between officials and it is expected
that certain agreements will be reached in the near future.

The Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and
the President of the United States agreed that all outstanding inter-
national questions should be Settled not by the application of force
but by peaceful means through negotiation.

Finally it was agreed that an exact date for the return visit of
the President to the Soviet Union next spring would be arranged
through diplomatic channels.
Washington, September 27, 1959

PRESS CONFERENCE IN WASHINGTON September 27

STATEMENT BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV

My esteemed fellow-traveling journalists. You will excuse me
for this somewhat unusual form of address. Many of you have been
traveling with me through the United States and therefore I look
upon you as my travel companions, my sputniks.

To begin with, allow me to make public the text of the joint
Soviet-American communique.

(At N. S. Khrushchev's request, the interpreter, O. A. Troyanov-
sky, read the text of the communique in English.)

KHRUSHCHEV: Now I would like to thank you for the work you
have done and for your rather complete coverage of my trip. You
have had to work pretty hard.

190

I know that each of you wrote in a different way about my visit
to the USA and about my talks with President Dwight Eisenhower.
I have read some of your stories and I can see that they were written
in a well-meaning spirit, with a knowledge of what was what But
that was not always the case. Some find it difficult to give up cold-war
methods. It is gratifying, however, that most of the journalists with
whom I have had contact tried as best they could to be objective in
covering our visit to the United States.

Now, a couple of words about my impressions. I have a great
many impressions. Today I shall speak to you as a man enriched by
all that he has seen and heard in your great country. I had meetings
with the President; with well-known statesmen and civic leaders in
your country, with businessmen and ordinary Americans. Our talks
were frank and straightforward, and that is good. All this helped us
to understand each other better. Of course, twelve days is a short
period to hope to see everything. But for us it has been a lot of time
in which to learn many things and to discuss many things with
Americans. As you know, in addition to Washington, we visited New
Ydrk and Los Angeles, San Francisco, Des Moines and Pittsburgh.

You are naturally most interested in my impressions of the
meetings we had with the President of the USA, Mr. Eisenhower.
We had pleasant talks. On all the subjects that we touched upon,
we had a great deal in common both as regards our evaluation of
the situation and the need to improve relations between our countries.

Everybody realizes that it is not so easy to throw off all the
litter that has piled up in the many years of cold war. We cannot
count on a sudden change in the situation. The process of improving
relations between our countries will require much effort and patience
and, above all, the desire of both sides to achieve that end

The Soviet Union, whose government and people I represent,
is guided by the interests of consolidating peace and friendship
between nations. We have made and will continue to make every
effort to end the cold war and improve relations between our countries.

I have no doubt whatsoever that the President is sincere in his
desire to improve relations between our countries. It seems to me
that the President of the USA is in a more difficult position than I
am. In the United States the forces obstructing an improvement of
relations between our countries and a relaxation of international
tension are, evidently, still influential. And that must be taken into
consideration. But I believe that, in the long run, common sense will

indicate the right course in settling international problems a course
leading to the consolidation of peace throughout the world.

My meetings with representatives of the business world of your
country showed that there is a mutual interest in reviving the rela-
tions and ties which would be beneficial to both countries. At the
same time, this would afford an opportunity to consider in a calm
atmosphere the ways and means of replacing military production by
civilian production.

I would like to say a great deal about my meetings with workers
and fanners, students and intellectuals of your country. I like your
people. Just like the Soviet people, they want one thing peace and
prevention of another war. They want to know more about the
Soviet Union and the Soviet people in order to utilize the grand
potentialities of our countries for the good of the people and an
improvement of the international situation.

I have been asked everywhere whether I like your way of life.
Naturally, I like our way of life better. But I do not want to dis-
appoint you and will frankly say that regardless of the difference in
the way of life of our countries, we can work together well and
usefully in the international arena. After all, we did have good rela-
tions in the years of our joint war effort against the common enemy.
And there are no insurmountable obstacles to reviving and develop-
ing that cooperation also in the struggle for peace.

Our meeting with the President, Mr. Eisenhower, will be fol-
lowed by his visit to the Soviet Union. Our people will receive him
just as cordially and hospitably as your people received me and the
other representatives of the Soviet Union accompanying me.

I am now prepared to answer your questions.

QUESTION: You have called for a vast expansion of consumer
goods trade between the United States and the Soviet Union during
your earlier press conference at the National Press Club. Do you
think now your visit to America will result in increased peaceful
trade?

KHRUSHCHEV: In replying to this question, I would, first and
foremost, like to stress, so that the gentlemen of the Western press
would understand clearly, that the Soviet Union is not a colony. Our
country is one of the biggest industrial powers. Its industry, economic
potential and level of scientific and technical development enable us
to produce all kinds of goods, both the articles needed to promote a
rapid growth of industry and agriculture, and consumer goods. So if
some people in the United States of America think 6f selling us

192

sausages or shoes, those, of course, are not the kind of goods for
expanding trade between our countries. Let them look for buyers of
such goods elsewhere. We want to buy what interests us and sell
what interests you, and this includes consumer goods and goods for
the development of industry machine equipment, for example.

QUESTION: Do you not think that there will be more progress
now in the development of Soviet-American ties in the cultural field?

KHRUSHCHEV: We shall not be behind in that respect We favor
a broad exchange of delegations, an exchange of spiritual values, and
are ready to do all in our power to develop Soviet-American relations
in the cultural field on a reasonable, mutually acceptable basis. We
would like the United States of America likewise to be ready to do
that

QUESTION: Do you feel that there was any planned attempt to
hinder your reception in America and, if so, who do you think
planned it?

KHRUSHCHEV: I agree with you, Mr. Schorr, with what you had
in mind, when you were planning this question. (Laughter.) But it
would be discourteous for a guest to point a finger at the people,
who, so to say, forced themselves to accept, or by force of a certain
necessity accepted, my visit I, naturally, do not imply high-placed
persons, but speak of certain people who play quite an important
role in the general state machine of the United States of America.
True, not everybody favored my visit. But the persons who counted
on preventing a good reception for me in the USA have failed.

QUESTION: Mr. Chairman, the joint communique says both sides
expounded their views on Berlin. Has the position of the Soviet
Union changed as a result of your talks with President Eisenhower?

KHRUSHCHEV: That is a very complicated question and a simple
answer will not do. Besides, I do not know how the author of the
question understands this problem, how he understands our position
on Berlin. But since our position on the Berlin question has been
expounded fairly comprehensively, the President and I exchanged
views on this question as well and we found much in common in our
understanding of it I think that is quite sufficient for a press con-
ference. (Animation.)

QUESTION: What will you tell the Russian people about the
United States when you return?

KHRUSHCHEV: Have patience until tomorrow. My plane arrives
in Moscow at 3 P.M., Moscow time, and at 4 P.M. I shall address
the people of Moscow. If you want to listen in (I don't know if my

193

speech will be broadcast in your country), you will learn by radio
what I shall tell the Muscovites. If you don't, my speech will be
published in the press on the next day and you can read it in the
newspapers. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Which questions do you-- consider the most mature
for discussion at a meeting of the heads of government of the Great
Powers?

KHRUSHCHEV: All questions which tend to worsen international
relations and hinder normal relations with the United States and
other Western countries should be discussed at a conference of heads
of government They must be resolved and the obstacles hindering
normal relations between countries must be removed so as to create
a wanner atmosphere in international relations, so that relations be-
tween countries could develop in more favorable circumstances, so
that they could improve steadily and become friendly.

QUESTION: At the National Press Club you said that capitalism,
being more progressive than feudalism, replaced it, and that socialism
will replace capitalism for the same reason. What, in your opinion,
will in turn follow communism? (Laughter.)

KHRUSHCHEV: Having built socialism, we in the Soviet Union
have started to build communism and are in the first stage of the
building of communism. To one degree or another, the other socialist
countries are completing the construction of socialism. We have still,
if one can say so, not tried what the communist system gives people
and society. Yet here among you is a man who demands that he be
given a new pie. (Laughter.) Why should I look for a new pie when
I consider the communist pie the best We shall eat it with pleasure
and will share it with anyone who wants it (Animation.)

QUESTION: Mr. Chairman, do you think that a summit meeting
is now assured? When and where would you propose to hold it?

KHRUSHCHEV: Only a director of some institution could use
such a tone with his employees and say that everything is now ready
as far as he is concerned and all that remains is to sign an order and
everything will proceed as he wants it

A summit meeting requires the consent of all the heads of
government concerned. I therefore cannot say that everything is
ready for such a meeting. Agreement has yet to be reached on this.
I believe that the conditions necessary for calling a meeting of heads
of government have already ripened. Personally, I am ready for the
meeting to be held anywhere. It will have to be held where the
majority of the heads of government find it most convenient So far

194

as we are concerned, this is not a special question and it is not worth-
while making a principle of it Geneva, for instance, is a good place
for a meeting of heads of government.

QUESTION: Has the hope for permanent world peace increased
as the result of your talks with President Eisenhower?

KHRUSHCHEV: I have never relinquished the hope for peace and
have always believed that if people make an effort to ensure peace,
peace will be preserved. After meeting with Mr. Eisenhower, the
President of the United States, my hopes are now stronger than ever
before, because during my talks with him I felt that he, too, is show-
ing a concern to ensure peace just as we are doing.

QUESTION: Do you still believe that the only way to solve thS
German problem is to sign peace treaties with both East and West
Germany?

KHRUSHCHEV: Day follows night, and after war, peace must
come. That is why a peace treaty must be signed. With whom? With
the two existing German states, because there is no united Germany.
There is no other way; at least, I can see no other. If you have some
other solution, tell me about it I think you will not find another
solution either.

QUESTION: Before your arrival and during your stay in the
United States, some people here said that you ought to be taught a
lesson with a demonstration of American power, with a display of
the American way of life, so as to convince you of the advantages of
capitalism. How do you feel, Nikita Sergeyevich, after these heavy
lectures?

KHRUSHCHEV: To teach a lesson is not a suitable phrase with
regard to representatives of the great Soviet Union. Whoever thought
that way was not a sensible person. As regards my convictions and
which system I think is better, this is not the suitable place in which
to hold a discussion on that score. We are not forcing our system on
anyone and, personally, having been in the United States, I am con-
vinced more than ever that the holiest of holies, the best that man
can create is socialist society, the communist system, where man is
indeed a friend and brother to man. How do I feel after my trip?
To put it in a nutshell: God grant that you may feel as well as I do!
(Animation, applause.)

QUESTION: Would the Soviet Union allow foreign observers on
its soil at the precise moment that proposed disarmament begins,
allow them to travel at will during the process of disarmament, and
allow them to remain there until all disarmament is completed?

195

KHRUSHCHEV: If you carefully read our disarmament proposals,
which I expounded in my speech at the UN General Assembly, you
will find, I think, that our position on this question is explained there
quite exhaustively. If you like, I can repeat it Our idea is that when
disarmament starts there should be a corresponding stage of inspec-
tion at each stage of disarmament, that is to say, the representatives
of the other countries should be present and there should be inspec-
tion in the regions subject to inspection by agreement And that will
take place throughout the process of disarmament, until it is com-
pleted After there is complete disarmament, then inspectors must,
of course, remain in the countries concerned to see that the disarma-
ment agreement is religiously observed by each state.

If our proposals are accepted and there is general disarmament,
the question of secrecy will fall away. People will then be able to go
wherever and whenever they please, with the exception, perhaps,
of places where the permission of the housewife must first be asked.
(Laughter.)

QUESTION: What reasons did President Eisenhower give you for
postponing his visit to Russia until spring?

KHRUSHCHEV: I shall let you in on a secret, although I have not
asked the President's permission to do so. But he promised to listen
hi and he will know what I shall say. For that reason I shall take
the liberty of telling you how it happened.

Yesterday the President kindly invited me to his farm and
introduced me to his wonderful grandchildren. I had, so to speak,
direct contact with them a kind of "conference." I asked them if
they thought they could accompany their grandfather and, if so, when
would they like to go with him to the Soviet Union.

At that "conference/* jointly with the President's grandchildren,
we unanimously decided that they definitely must come to Moscow.
The question of the most suitable time for such a trip arose, and I
must admit that I suggested that the best time for the President, and
especially for his grandchildren, is in summer or spring, when every-
thing is in bloom and fragrant, when no cold autumn or winter winds
blow. Then, in a most amiable manner, we had an exchange of views
on this question with the President and came to just such a conclu-
sion. Therefore, do not look for fleas where no fleas exist, and try to
understand how these questions are resolved in a human way.
(Laughter.)

Well, I have told you how that happened. If the President con-
siders that I, as a partner, have overstepped my authority and

196

revealed some special secrets about our talks, I ask him to forgive
me.

I think that my grandchildren, too, will approve of our decision.
So, if we are to speak of our grandchildren, then they are agreed that
the visit of the President of the USA to the Soviet Union should take
place in spring or summer, and the grandfathers also agree with this.
(Laughter, applause.)

QUESTION: What do you now think of the United States, of the
American people, and o.f the possibility of peaceful coexistence and
cooperation between the USSR and the USA?

KHRUSHCHEV: Experience tells all nations that countries with
different social systems must coexist, live in peace, be friends and
develop normal relations. That has always been my position, and
my conviction that it is a correct one is now firmer than ever before.

QUESTION: If disarmament is effected, how many men would
you thus release for your civilian economy? (Animation.)

KHRUSHCHEV: This, I think, is not only journalistic but also
overflowing female curiosity. (Laughter.) I will tell you frankly that
if we get disarmament, and that is something we want, then all the
soldiers, generals, officers, admirals and airmen who are now doing
military service will go home.

QUESTION: When President Eisenhower asked you for assur-
ances that Western rights in West Berlin would continue to be re-
spected, what was your answer?

KHRUSHCHEV: The President and I have exchanged views on
many questions and I think it is not necessary to make everything
public. We have already made a lot public. We shall meet again and
talk and after that again tell you what we consider necessary. How
inquisitive you are! Have patience and we shall tell you. When the
time comes, we shall tell you everything.

QUESTION: Those of us who went to the USSR with Vice-Presi-
dent Nixon were surprised at the number of young people in church.
If there is an increasing interest in religion, what will be your attitude
toward churches?

KHRUSHCHEV: First, by asking that question you confirm our
repeated statements that we have complete freedom of religion.
Secondly, people also go to church simply out of curiosity. Generally
speaking, curiosity is characteristic of young people. For example,
I told the President how, one day, immediately after the war, Marshal
Tolbukhin, with whom I had spent a lot of time at the front near
Stalingrad, paid me a visit I had invited him for dinner. My children

197

were still small then. When Marshal Tolbukhin arrived, they all
gathered and gazed at him from around a corner, out of curiosity,
and then said among themselves: "There, at last we have seen a
living marshal**

Similarly, children and young people who hear elderly people
speak of religion, of the saints and of God, want to go and see for
themselves what goes on in church. It is interesting to them. But if
each young man and girl were to go to church out of curiosity just
once, the doors of churches would never close. They would be creak-
ing all the time with people going in and out

Or take the case of me, a Communist, coming to your country
now. How many people came out into the streets to see a living
Soviet Communist! Suppose a prominent capitalist comes to the
Soviet Union. How many people would want to take a look at him, to
pull him by the tail, so to speak, if he has such an appendage to his
person! (Laughter.) A very large number of people would gather,
and there would be nothing surprising in that.

Ladies and gentlemen, there are still many more questions and
I would have answered them all with pleasure* but the clock keeps
its own count I shall soon have to speak on television. Therefore,
in conclusion, allow me to thank you most sincerely for your atten-
. tion and to wish you success. I would ask you to spare no effort in
ensuring good relations between our countries, so that there is friend-
ship and peace between, our countries, so that there is peace through-
out the world. (Applause.)

Good-bye. Thank you. (Prolonged applause.)

N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S BROADCAST OVER U.S. TELEVISION

September 27, 1959

Good evening, American friends.

I am glad of this opportunity of talking to you before leaving
for my country. We liked your beautiful cities and fine roads, but
most of all your amiable, kind-hearted people. And let these words
of mine not be taken as the guest's customary tribute of courtesy
and respect to his host

Those who have visited the Soviet Union will have told you
about the very good feelings which the Soviet people have for you
and about their wish to live in peace and friendship with you. And I
win now take with me the certainty that you feel the same way about
the Soviet people. I am going to tell them about it.

198

I have had very pleasant talks with President Dwight Eisen-
hower. In all matters touched upon in our conversations, we had .
much in common, both as regards our appraisal of the situation and
the need for better relations between our countries.

You will realize that it is not so easy to overcome all that has
piled up in the many years of cold war. Think of all the speeches
that did not promote better relations but, on the contrary, aggra-
vated them! That being so, we cannot expect an abrupt change in
the situation. The process of improving relations between our coun-
tries will require great effort and patience, but above all else a
mutual desire to create conditions that will facilitate a shift from
the present state of tension to normal relations, and then to friend-
ship in tie interests of durable peace throughout the world.

The Soviet Union, whose government and people I represent,
is guided by the desire to promote peace and friendship among na-
tions. We have always done our utmost to end the cold war and
improve relations between our countries, and we do so now.

I have not the slightest doubt that the President sincerely
desires better relations between our countries. It seems to me that
the position of the U.S. President is more difficult than mine. It
would appear that the forces obstructing better relations between
our countries and a relaxation of international tension are still influ-
ential in the United States of America. And that must be taken into
account. I think, however, that common sense will in the end suggest
the right course in the settlement of international problems. And
that course, the only correct course, is the termination of the cold war
and the promotion of universal peace.

But it takes more than two states to end international tension.
This can only be done if all states desire it and work for it

There can be no stability or peace in the world as long as the
two mightiest powers are at odds.

Picture two neighbors. Each disapproves of the way the other
lives and runs his household. So they fence themselves off from each
other. And together with their families, they revile each other day
and night Is that a happy life to live? Anyone will say that it is not;
sooner or later the two neighbors may come to blows.

Bad neighbors have a way out, at least one of them could sell
his house and move into another. But what about states? They cannot
move elsewhere, can they? What is the solution then?

You have capitalism in your country, and we have socialism.
Must we on this account push things to the point of a world-wide

free-for-all? Or shall we establish normal relations and live in peac
each in his own way? Everybody in the Soviet Union wants all cou
tries to live in peace, everybody wants peaceful coexistence.

Have you ever given any thought to the following? Why do y<
and we need all these armaments if we have no intention of goii
to war? I have been told that your country annually spends an av
age of more than 40 billion dollars on armaments. What about u
There's been no point in concealing the fact that we spend abo
25 billion dollars a year for the same purpose. Couldn't a better u
be found for the people's money?

To be sure, it is not easy for any country to accept disarmame
unless it is certain that the others will do likewise. Every count
has fears of being attacked

You probably know that a week ago the Soviet Governmei
submitted to the United Nations a proposal for general and comple
disarmament and for the most rigid, comprehensive control. Wh
have we in mind? We propose that all armed forces be complete
abolished, that all weapons, including atomic, hydrogen and rocki
weapons, be destroyed The states should retain no more than strict)
limited contingents of police armed with small arms. But if ox
partners should be unwilling to take measures as far-reaching as tha
we are prepared, for a start, to reach agreement on partial stej
toward disarmament

We are gratified that many statesmen and political leaders ai
giving serious thought to these proposals of ours and on their par
are taking steps to bring about the necessary agreement on disarms
ment Unfortunately, some people still cling to the arguments of th
cold-war period. We should like to hope that the governments of th
USA and other countries will take a correct view of our peacefu
proposals and will, for their part, take appropriate steps in the sam
direction.

We discussed this problem in detail during our conversation
with your President The President, like ourselves, is concerns
about the fact that so far we have not succeeded in ending the anna
ments fever. I am going home in the hope that the U.S. Governmen
will be able to overcome deep-rooted prejudices and that sooner o
later, in common with all the other countries, we will find the correc
approach to the solution of the disarmament problem.

We have also discussed other pressing matters, of which quit
a number have piled up these days. I will, first of all, single out thi
problem of removing the aftermath of the Second World War. Man:

200

eople ask why the Soviet Union is so concerned about the question
f removing those vestiges. After all, ifs a thing of the distant past,
ley argue. I will speak plainly: We are not afraid of German mili-
uism. But we know its insidious ways and habits only too well. The
bsence of a peace treaty creates an atmosphere which stimulates
jvanchist sentiment Don't misunderstand me t The survivals of war
lust not be allowed to stay if we are to have peace.

The Soviet Union has proposed that a line be drawn through the
econd World War. This can and must be done by signing a treaty
dth Germany.

The argument is sometimes used against us that since the war
'as waged against Germany when she was a single state, a peace
eaty can only be concluded after Germany is unified. But it is well
nown that, at present, two German states exist in reality, and each
f them lives in its own way. Neither of the German states wants to
ive up its social system. And surely there can be no question of
>rcing one German state to surrender to the other. Let the Germans
lemselves reach agreement on how they should live, on how they
lould shape their mutual relations.

Would it not be best to conclude a peace treaty with both Ger-
lan states without further delay, and thereby put out the sparks
uried in the ashes before they set off a new conflagration? Conclu-
on of a peace treaty would also put out the live spark in West
erlin, with the result that a normal situation would be created.

The question of a German peace treaty, like the disarmament
uestion, is not an easy one. But precisely because these are difficult
uestions, they must be settled and not shelved.

During my stay in your country I have acquainted myself with
le life of the American people as best I could in so short a time,
ad have seen and heard a good deal. I am most grateful for the
arm reception and cordiality accorded to me, as head of the Soviet
rovernment, and to my companions. We were strengthened in the
jnviction that the American people are striving for friendship with
or people and that they love peace and their country. They have
eated great riches and achieved a high standard of living. Like
>u the Soviet people love their country and want peace. They
ant to live in friendship with your people, and with all the other
copies of the world.

The peoples of the Soviet Union have made great progress,
tanks to the victory of socialism. And though we are not yet as rich

201

as you, we are on the right path that leads to the achievement of the
highest standard of living. Our people are striving for it, and it shall
be achieved

The question of social and political structure, that is, whether
to live under socialism or capitalism, is the internal affair of each
people, and noninterference by states in each other's domestic affairs
should be strictly adhered to.

If all countries are guided by these principles, there will be no
particular difficulties in assuring international peace. To live in peace,
we must know each other better. Allow me to tell you, if only briefly,
about our country, the life of our people and our plans for the future.
I hope you will not misunderstand me when I say that the impres-
sions which I have gained here, and indeed the things that I liked
in your country, have not shaken my conviction that the political,
economic and social mode of life in the Soviet Union is the most pro-
gressive and just.

The Soviet Union is a state of working people. We have^no
capitalists. Our factories and mills belong to the people and so does
all the land with its riches. Peasants work on that land as members
of collective farms. Each has an income that depends on the amount
of work he puts in, not on capital invested

Under socialism, the remuneration paid to a worker depends
on the quantity and quality of the work he performs for the good of
society. When we have expanded production still more and accumu-
lated greater wealth, we will go over to distribution according to the
communist principle, which means that each will work according to
his ability and enjoy the good things of life according to his needs.

The Constitution of our state is, in fact, the most democratic. It
guarantees universal, direct and equal suffrage by secret ballot. It
guarantees the right to work, to education and to rest and leisure.

Before the Revolution in our country, he who had capital was
considered wise. For the first time in history, our country has estab-
lished the just principle: He who works well enjoys social distinction.

Take the composition of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which
is the country's highest organ of state power. There are 1,378 depu-
ties elected to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, of whom 366 are
women. Over 1,000 deputies are directly engaged in industrial or
agricultural production they are workers, engineers, collective fann-
ers, agronomists. The other deputies are statesmen, public leaders,
scientific or cultural workers, men of letters, art workers, teachers,
doctors. As you see, there are no capitalists in our country and no

202

capitalist representatives in the Supreme Soviet Those who make
up our government are the sons and daughters of working people.

I will tell you about mysell My grandfather was an illiterate
peasant He was the landlord's property and could be sold or even,
as was often the case, traded for a dog. My father was a coal miner,
and I, too, worked in a coal pit as a fitter. I fought in our Civil War.
Then the Soviet state sent me to a workers* school and later to the
Industrial Academy. Now the people have entrusted me with the high
office of Chairman of the Council of Ministers.

Recently, both my First Deputies, Anastas Mikoyan and Frol
Kozlov, visited your country. Who are they? Anastas Mikoyan is the
son of a carpenter, and Frol Ko2lov is the son of a blacksmith and
was himself a worker and later an engineer. There is no such thing
as inheriting capital or high posts in our country.

All members of Soviet society enjoy genuine freedom. The only
thing we do not have is the freedom to exploit other people's labor,
to privately own factories or banks.

We people of the older generation started life in a capitalist
environment But why do we consider the socialist way more just?
For hundreds of years mankind had developed under conditions
where a minority appropriated the riches created by the majority.
And always people had sought a better social structure under which
there would be no exploitation of man by man.

We are grateful to Marx, Angels and Lenin who blazed the
trail to that society, and we have taken that trait And the same path
was taken after us by many peoples of Europe and Asia. Having
taken power into their hands, the working people put an end to the
urge for profiting at other people's expense. Human greed is a terrible
thing. Has there ever been a millionaire who did not want to be a
multimillionaire?

I want to be understood correctly. It is one thing when a person
has a pair of shoes and wants to have two or three pairs more, when
he has one suit and wants to have a few more, or when he has a
house and wants to build himself a better one. That is a legitimate
desire. Socialism does not limit people's tastes or requirements. But
it is quite another thing when a person owns a factory and wants to
have two, or when he owns one mill and wants to have ten. It should
be perfectly clear that no one, even if he is helped by his entire
family, and even if he were to live more than one life, can earn
a million", and still less a billion dollars, by his own labor. He can

203

do that only if he appropriates the labor of others. But surely that
is contrary to man's conscience. You will remember that even the
Bible says that when they who engaged in trade turned the temple
into a house of usurers and money-changers, Christ took a whip and
drove them out

That is why religious people should not oppose the new social-
ist system if, in accordance with their moral code, they are guided
by the principles of peace on earth and love of one's neighbor. For
it is a system which establishes the most human and truly just rela-
tions in society.

To help you understand why we are so proud of our Soviet
country, I must say a few words about our pre-Revolutionary past
The people had a very hard life in those days. Almost 80 per cent
of the population was illiterate. Hunger and disease killed millions
of people.

You will now find it easier to understand why Soviet people
are so happy that their country has in a short time become the
world's second greatest industrial power. We have increased indus-
trial output 36-fold, eliminated illiteracy, and are now graduating
almost three times as many engineers as the USA.

Our people would still be better off today if, out of 4QL years, we
had not spent almost two decades on wars imposed upon us, and on
postwar economic rehabilitation.

Do you know that during the war the German fascist invaders
burned down or otherwise destroyed 1,710 towns and townships and
upward of 70,000 villages, leaving about 25 million people homeless?
We lost many millions of people and suffered material damage
amounting to nearly 500 billion dollars.

But for these fearful losses and destruction, we would probably
have caught up with the United States by now both hi volume of
output and in living standards.

Today our people are busy fulfilling the seven-year plan. In the
current seven-year period we will double industrial output In this
period, we will invest the equivalent of nearly 750 billion dollars in
the national economy.

Today the United States is economically the most highly-devel-
oped power. Your country's economic indices are the peak of what
has been attained in the capitalist world. But don't forget that, on
the average, the Soviet Union's annual rate of industrial growth is
three to five times as high as yours. That means that in the next ten
to twelve years we will exceed the United States both in physical

204

volume of industry and in per capita output And in agriculture
this task will be fulfilled much earlier.

Our country is carrying on large-scale housing construction. Here
is an example: In the past eight years alone more housing was built
in Moscow than throughout the 800 years of its pre-Revolutionary
history. Next year the people of Moscow will have additional housing
whose total floor space will exceed one quarter of all the housing
available in our capital before the Revolution. In the current seven-
year period we will build about 15 million apartments in towns and
7 million houses in the countryside. That is roughly equivalent to
some 50 new towns as large as San Francisco. An important point
is that our country has the world's lowest rent a mere 4 or 5 per
cent of the family budget

We are seeing to it that there are more comfortable homes and
that Soviet people get more and better consumer goods. And we are
as good as our word In the last six years Soviet agriculture has
trebled meat sales to the urban population, and more than doubled
those of milk

It will not be long before we abolish I repeat, abolish all
taxation of the population. I believe you fully appreciate the signi-
ficance of this measure.

The Communist Party, the Soviet Government and the trade
unions are working for the welfare of all Soviet people.

Soviet people need not fear anything like unemployment, for
example. The term ''unemployment" is long forgotten in our country.
In the Soviet Union, it is not people who look for work, but work
that looks for people.

All our children go to school In the Soviet Union tuition is free
not only in secondary schools, but also in higher schools. Students
receive state allowances. We give a very great deal of attention to
the education of children. Nursery school, kindergarten, boarding-
school, and then a start in life such is the clear road of our rising
generation.

The merits of the Soviet educational system are widely known.
It is the people educated in Soviet schools scientists, engineers, tech-
nicians and workers who amazed the world with the first man-made
earth satellites. We are proud that the Russian words "sputnik" and
"lunik" are now understood all over the world, without having to be
translated.

Two million teachers and almost 400,000 doctors are serving
the welfare of Soviet people.

205

We are taking care of the health of our people; the sick rate
has sharply declined in our country and the death rate is the lowest
in the world. Every factory or office worker is granted paid leave
every year. The working people have the best sanatoriums, health
resorts and vacation resorts at their disposal. Medical treatment is
free for all in our country, and neither a minor operation nor the most
complicated one entails any expense for the patient. Sometimes you
don't understand certain aspects of our way of life. And Soviet people
find it hard to understand how it can be that when you are in trouble
because someone in your family is seriously ill and has to be operated
on or sent to a hospital, you have to pay money for it And what if you
have no money? What happens then must the sick man die?

When somebody is ill in our country and cannot work, he gets
his pay just the same. And when old age comes along he does not feel
abandoned, for he gets a state pension. Peasants are pensioned out
of the funds of their collective farms.

You may ask: "Is everything really so good and smooth in your
country?" I am afraid not, because we also have our difficulties,
shortcomings and unsolved problems. I can assure you that we Soviet
people are the most scathing and uncompromising critics of our own
shortcomings.

Esteemed citizens of the United States of America, in a few
hours our plane will leave American soil. I wish once again to thank
the American people, President Eisenhower and the U.S. Govern-
ment for the hospitality and good feelings shown us. I credit these
good feelings and the attention shown to me, as head of the Soviet
Government, to the people of my country.

During my stay in your country I have received thousands of
letters and telegrams of greeting from American citizens. They
express friendship for the Soviet people. Many of them invited my
companions and myself to visit their homes and meet their families
and their children. I should like to go to all the places I was invited to,
but unfortunately that is out of the question. To do it, I should have
to stay here a long time. And that, you will realize, is something I
cannot do. Allow me to give my heartfelt thanks to all who extended
their friendly invitation, to all who expressed friendly sentiments.

Allow me, in conclusion, to wish the American people prosperity
and happiness, and also to express the hope that our visit to the
United States, and President Dwight Eisenhower's forthcoming visit
to the Soviet Union, will be regarded not only by the American and

206

Soviet peoples, but also by all the other peoples, as the beginning of
joint efforts in the search for ways of bringing our countries closer
together and promoting universal peace.
Good-bye and good luck, friends!

SPEECH BY N. S. KHRUSHCHEV
ON HIS DEPARTURE FROM THE USA

On the evening of September 27, N. S. Khrushchev, Chairman of
the Council of Ministers of the USSR, on his departure from the USA,
in reply to the speech of Richard M. Nixon, Vice-President of the USA,
who was seeing him off, said:

DEAR MR NIXON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:

Our visit to the United States of America at the kind invitation
of Mr. Eisenhower, President of the United States, has ended We
visited various cities in your country from the Atlantic to the Pacific;
we had many pleasant meetings and talks with Americans, with
business people of America, political and public figures; we met work-
ers, farmers and intellectuals.

As a result of the useful talks we had with President Eisenhower,
we reached a mutual agreement that all outstanding international is-
sues should be settled, not through use of force, but by peaceful means
through negotiation.

When we come home we shall tell the Soviet people of our
impressions, of the meetings and talks on American soil. The entire
Soviet people are striving to live in peace; they want friendly rela-
tions to be established between our great states. We are convinced
that the American people also desire peace.

There are quite a number of complicated outstanding questions
in our relations; nevertheless, let us not return to the past, but
look to the future and do all we can for that future. Let us job
efforts to consolidate peace, to improve mutual understanding among
all the nations of the world.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for the kind hospi-
tality for your bread and salt I would like to wish that we more
and more frequently use in the relations between our countries, the
short and good American word "O.K."

Good-bye, friends!

207

TO PRESIDENT DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Radiogram from the TU-114 plane

Crossing the frontier of the United States, I beg you, Mr. Presi-
dent, to accept, on behalf of the members of my family and the
persons accompanying me, and also on my own behalf, cordial grati-
tude for the invitation to visit your great country and for. the warm
reception extended to us by you personally and by the American
people. Our acquaintance with the life of the American people was
extremely interesting and useful

The exchange of opinions on most important international prob-
lems and on questions of Soviet-American relations has shown that
the trend toward undertaking the efforts needed to end the cold war
and to create a climate of confidence and mutual understanding
between our countries is on the ascendancy. Our meetings will defin-
itely help to ease international tension and to strengthen the cause
of universal peace.

I thank you sincerely once more, Mr. President, and I thank the
American people for their hospitality. We assure you that the Soviet
people and the Soviet Government will, in turn, extend to you as
hospitable a reception when you come to the Soviet Union.

I wish you, Mr. President, your wife, your son and your won-
derful grandchildren, with whom it was so easy for me to agree on
the time of your visit to the USSR, I wish all of your family happi-
ness and well-being.

I wish happiness and prosperity to the entire American people.

N. KHRUSHCHEV,

Chairman of the Council of Ministers of
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
September 27, 1959.

HIS EXCELLENCY NIKITA S. KHRUSHCHEV,
CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS
OF THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS

Reply Radiogram
Dear Mr. Chairman:

I am grateful for the cordial message you sent to me from your
plane, as you left the United States, and glad that you fdund both

208

pleasant and interesting the brief visit to our country by yourself,
your family and members of your official party. For my part, I found
the meetings with you most interesting, instructive and pleasant

It is gratifying to know that you feel our discussions may con-
stitute some small step in the promotion of mutual understanding
and the reduction of the causes of those international tensions which
have brought us great difficulty in the past We share the hope that
concrete and meaningful progress in the important field of disarma-
ment can be made. Nothing could be more useful than progressive
and mutually fair discussions in the promotion of the just and durable
peace which I am sure the peoples of both our countries earnestly
seek

The members of my family join me in greetings to you and
your family, and the assurance that we look forward to our later
visit to your country.

With the prayerful hope that such meetings as this will prove of
real benefit to the world, and with personal wishes for the health and
well-being of yourself, your family and the people of the Soviet
Union.

Sincerely,

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER

209

IN MOSCOW September 28

MEETING OF THE PEOPLE OF MOSCOW

IN HONOR OF N. S. KHRUSHCHEV'S RETURN

TO THE SOVIET UNION

On September 28 a meeting of the people of Moscow was held
in the Sports Palace of the Central V. I. Lenin Stadium in honor of
the return of the head of the Soviet Government, N. S. Khrushchev,
from his trip to the United States of America.

The tremendous hall is filled to capacity. Over the rostrum a
crimson streamer bears the words, "Long live the peaceful policy of
the Communist Party and the Soviet Government!"

In a single impulse all present rise from their seats and a storm
of applause flares up when N. S. Khrushchev, A. B. Aristov, L I.
Brezhnev, K. Y. Voroshilov, N. G. Ignatov, A I Kirichenko, F. R
Kozlov, O. V. Kuusinen, A. L Mikoyan, N. A. Mukhitdinov, E. A.
Furtseva, P. N. Pospelov, D. S. Korotchenko, J. E. Kalnberzins, A P.
Kirilenko, A N. Kosygin, K T. Mazurov, V. P. Mzhavanadzo, M. G.
Pervukhin, N. V. Podgorny, D. S. Polyansky, the members of N. S.
Khrushchev's party in his tour of the USA and others appear on the
rostrum. Also present on the rostrum is Mr. E. L. Freers, Charge
d'Affaires ad interim of the USA in the USSR.

Present in the hall are the heads of diplomatic missions ac-
credited in Moscow.

V. I. Ustinov, First Secretary of the Moscow City Committee
of the CPSU, addressed the meeting with a short speech.

On behalf of the working people of Moscow he warmly and
heartily congratulated N. S. Khrushchev on the successful completion
of his historic visit to the United States of America.

"Muscovites, like all Soviet people, followed your trip with great
attention and impatiently awaited every report about your meetings
and talks on American soil," Comrade Ustinov said, addressing N. S.
Khrushchev.

210

"Your trip has yet again graphically proved to the whole world
that the Communist Party and the Soviet Government indefatigably
and consistently work for lasting peace and friendship among nations.
The forcible call: *Let us carry out total disarmament!' which you
made at the United Nations to all the states of the world, is unani-
mously upheld and approved by the working people of Moscow, by
all Soviet people. This call meets with the most ardent response in the
hearts of ordinary people in all lands! (Applause.)

"Your speeches and pronouncements addressed to the American
people contained the great truth about the first country of socialism,
about the inspired creative effort of Soviet people, the builders of
communism, about our people's ardent aspiration for peace. And we
Muscovites were particularly pleased that your simple and convincing
words were understood by ordinary Americans and found a vivid
response among them.

"The Soviet people are happy that your visit to the USA took
place at a time of such outstanding achievements of our people as
the successful launching of the Soviet space rocket to the moon
and the completion of the atomic icebreaker, Lenin. The scientists,
engineers, technicians and workers of Moscow are proud that these
wonderful achievements contain a share of their modest labor.

"The working people of Moscow are working with great inspira-
tion for the implementation of the seven-year plan, and with their
selfless effort they are enhancing the might of our great country.

"Allow me, dear Nikita Sergeyevich, to express, on behalf of
all present at this meeting and on behalf of all the working people
of Moscow, our warm gratitude for your tireless activity in the
name of peace and the happiness of the Soviet people and to
assure the Leninist Central Committee of our own Communist Party
that Muscovites will spare no effort or labor for the implementation
of the stupendous tasks of building communism! (Applause.)

"Long live the great Soviet people, the builders of Communism!
(Applause.)

"Long live the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the stand-
ard-bearer of peace and friendship among nations!" (Prolonged
applause.)

V. I. Ustinov declares the meeting open. The strains of the State Anthem
of the Soviet Union resound in the great hall.

The floor is then given to Y. N. Nikolayev, a machine-tool adjuster of the
Likhachev Motor Works.

211

SPEECH BY Y. N. NIKOLAYEV

DEAR NIKITA SERGEYEVICH:

Expressing the sincere desire and thoughts of the many-thou-
sand collective of the Likhachev Motor Works and all the working
people of the capital, I convey to you heartfelt gratitude for your
indefatigable struggle for peace and happiness of the Soviet people.
(Prolonged applause,)

The greatest feeling we are experiencing now, Nikita Serge-
yevich, is the feeling of tremendous joy from the knowledge that
you are again in our midst, on our native Soviet soil. (Applause.)
If we may speak figuratively, we did not part with youl Our hearts
were with you during your historical tour of the United States. We
of the Motor Works, like the entire Soviet people, warmly applauded
you when you put forward the bold and clear-cut plan for complete
and general disarmament You expressed the opinion of all the
Soviet people when you spoke of our friendly feelings for the Ameri-
can people, and our fervent wish to live in peace with all nations.

We noted with great satisfaction the statement contained in
the Soviet-American Communique to the effect that all outstanding
international questions should be decided by peaceful means, by
negotiations, and not by use of force.

We Soviet workers found it a matter after our own hearts when
you, Nikita Sergeyevich, with the folk wisdom characteristic of you,
gave in your speeches and talks a telling rebuff to those who hate
communism and are the champions of the cold war. (Applause.)
The workers avidly read your striking speeches and said to each
other:

"Nikita Sergeyevich is crushing the ice of the cold war with
the strength of an atomic icebreaker and striking the enemies of
peace with the accuracy of the Soviet moon rocket!" (Prolonged
applause.)

Frankly, we cannot understand those people across the ocean
who praise the capitalist way of life and at the same time envy our
great achievements. No fables about a capitalist paradise can muddle
us Soviet people. We are proud of the socialist system. We are proud
of our sputniks and the Soviet pennants planted on the moon.

We are proud of our majestic seven-year pkn and are working
with great enthusiasm to fulfill it ahead of time. The many thousands
employed at the Likhachev Motor Works are making their contribu-
tion to this nationwide cause. By September 22 the workers of the

212

plant had successfully fulfilled the plan for the first nine months of
the year and gave our country 85 million rubles* worth of goods in
excess of the plan. (Applause.) I also am not lagging behind my
comrades: I am topping my work assignment by 80 per cent, and
more. (Applause.)

Soon our plant will switch over to a seven-hour working day.
We consider this to be a fresh and striking manifestation of the care
the Party takes of the Soviet people. We assure the Central Commit-
tee of our Party and the Soviet Government, that in seven hours we
shall produce as much as in an eight-hour day. (Applause.)

It is neither thirst for profit nor need that make us fulfill our
plans. Work for the people, for ourselves, for our Soviet state, the
great aim towards which we are marching communism this is what
inspires us to great patriotic accomplishments. And I am convinced
that the time will come when the workers of America too will know
the joy of free labor in their own factories. (Applause.)

Long live peace and friendship among all nations!

Long live our own Communist Party, which is leading the Soviet
people to the triumph of communism! (Prolonged applause.)

U. M. Trofimova, team-leader of the Put Novoy Ztdzm Collective Farm,
Kuntsevo District (Moscow Region), is the next speaker.

SPEECH BY U. M. TROFIMOVA

DEAR NIKITA SERGE YE VICH:

Permit me to congratulate you from the bottom of my heart
on the successful end of your mission of friendship and peace to the
United States, and to convey to you the ardent greetings of the
collective farmers of Moscow suburban area. (Prolonged applause.)

The people at our collective farm, like all Soviet people, fol-
lowed your tour of the United States with great emotion and deep
interest

We felt and realized that this was no easy tour. Besides honest
and peace-loving people, there are other people in America who are
opposed to a relaxation of tension in international relations.

You, Nikita Sergeyevich, spoke to the Americans on behalf of
your people. You defended the cause of peace with great ability and
fervor. Your voice is the mighty voice of all Soviet people.

Ordinary people understand who is for peace and who fears a
thaw in relations among the Great Powers. Speaking in our own

213

collective-farm language, everyone today realizes that the road to
peace is the road to Moscow. We were pleased that the American
people met you with warmth and expressed friendly feelings for the
Soviet people.

Your visit, Nikita Sergeyevich, turned out to be a good lesson
for the capitalists. It is high time for them to understand that the
Soviet Union is no longer that ragged Russia where the only fare
of the poverty-ridden muzhik was thin cabbage soup with hardly
a crumb of bread to go with it. (Applause.) No, the USSR is a
mighty state who should be addressed as an equal among equals
and with whom it is necessary to live in peace and to maintain good-
neighborly relations.

We heartily approve the proposals you submitted on the ques-
tion of preserving peace and ending the cold war. Only our country
could propose general and complete disarmament

The clouds of the cold war are dispersing. Life and work have
become more cheerful. And look what's being done! We have decided
that the seven-year plan should be fulfilled in five years. (Applause.)
Let the Americans see what the collective farmers are capable of.
We assure you, Nikita Sergeyevich, that we shall hold our own in
the competition with the farmers, that we shall catch up with
America and surpass it in output of agricultural produce per capita!
(Prolonged applause.)

Facts themselves point to this. You remember, of course, Nikita
Sergeyevich, what our collective farm was like about five years ago.
And now? Preparing to mark the next plenary meeting of the Central
Committee of the Party in a fitting way, we shall produce at least
10 tons of meat and 100 tons of milk per hundred hectares of land
(Applause.) Our collective farm has introduced cash payment for
labor as well as annual holidays. From the beginning of next year
we will start issuing pensions to aged collective farmers. (Applause.)
This is how our life is changing. This is most striking proof of your
words that the Soviet system is bringing the working people greater
benefits than the capitalist system. (Applause.) We firmly believe
that the future belongs to communism. (. Applause.)

We most heartily wish you, an outstanding champion of peace
and friendship among nations, many years of life. (Prolonged ap-
plause.) Thank you for your great efforts for the good of the Soviet
people and for the whole of working mankind. (Applause.)

Long live our own Communist Party and the Soviet Govern-
ment! (Prolonged applause.)

214

The floor is given to Academician L. I. Sedov.
SPEECH BY L. /. SEDOV

OUR DEAR NIKITA SERGEYEVICH:

Soviet scientists, like all our people, are heartily congratulating
you on your return home from the United States of America where
you went on a peace visit. (Applause.)

With great attention and pride we heard your historic speeches
in which you expressed the Soviet people's desire for peace. We
admire the tireless energy, persistence and patience with which you
selflessly fight for strengthening peace and friendship among the
nations. (Applause.)

The old methods and conceptions for solving outstanding issues
between states by the use of force are becoming outdated. War in
our day is a catastrophe which spells doom to tens and hundreds of
millions of people. It is absolutely clear that war should not be al-
lowed; it can and must be banned from the life of society.

We are proud and happy to know that our Party, the Soviet
Government, and our people are in the front ranks of the struggle
for peace, and that the initiative and the main constructive proposals
as well as practical steps, aimed at consolidation of peace, come from
the Soviet Union. We are profoundly confident in the victory of plain
and sensible ideas, in the possibility of peaceful coexistence of differ-
ent social systems, in the cessation of the cold war, and in the es-
tablishment of an atmosphere of good-will and cooperation among
nations.

The Soviet Union's historic proposals on general and complete
disarmament which you, Nikita Sergeyevich, made in the United
Nations, are in accord with the vital interests and aspirations of broad
sections of the population in all countries of the world. There is no
doubt that there are still very many obstacles on the path to the
realization of these proposals. Yet the things which were only a dream
yesterday are becoming a reality today.

It is generally known that not more than two years ago there
were skeptics among scientists who did not believe that it was pos-
sible to launch successfully artificial earth satellites.

Our scientists, engineers, and workers have turned into reality
man's age-old dreams and were the first to pave the way to space
and interplanetary flights. We are proud to say that the first artificial
earth satellite and the first rocket flight to the moon were made by
the Soviet Union.

215

The socialist system provides unlimited opportunities for the
advancement of science and engineering.

We are living in a great era and are witnesses of the fact that
human society develops in a great measure under the influence of
the wise policy of the Soviet Union. This gives us confidence in the
fact that, in spite of all the difficulties, an end will be put to the cold
war. The achievements of science and engineering will go to serve
mankind's spiritual and material requirements.

Dear Nikita Sergeyevich, Soviet scientists realize the respon-
sibility they bear before their people and history, and will spare no
effort in solving the majestic problems of construction of commu-
nism, our country's bright and happy future. (Applause.)

Glory to our Communist Party and thfe Soviet Government!
(Prolonged applause.)

Long live peace the world over! (Prolonged applause.)

L. M. Selivanova, student of the Moscow Bauman Higher Technical School,
made a speech on behalf of the Soviet youth.

SPEECH BY L. M. SELIVANOVA

DEAR NIKITA SERGEYEVICH:

We feel particular joy greeting you today hi our wonderful
capital on your return from a long and difficult trip. (-Applause.)

If you only knew how excited the Soviet youth was during
your stay in America! How impatiently we waited for the news on the
radio and television, stood in long queues for newspapers, and with
what ardor we discussed every bit of news from overseas! There is
nothing surprising hi this, for peace and that means our future
was at stake.

It is a joy to live, work and dream when you are confident in
your future. What a great happiness men will feel when all tanks,
guns and bombs remain only on the pages of history textbooks and
civil dress will be the only uniform worn on earth. (Prolonged ap-
plause.)

Dear Nikita Sergeyevich, on behalf of our people, you have
clearly stated this in America, and the Soviet youth and the youth
of the globe is grateful to you for defending with such fortitude
and so passionately its future from the threats of a new war.
(Applause.)

It makes us laugh when we learn that there are still people on
earth who assert that we are intending to wage war against some-

216

body. There is, indeed, a militant spirit in the Soviet youth! We are
storming and will continue to storm nature's most treasured secrets,
the severe ice of the polar regions and the stellar voids of the uni-
verse. The fire in our hearts helps to light new blast furnaces, build
new power stations, plants, towns in the Siberian taiga, so as to make
man's life happier. Our new space rockets carry to the distant stars
our daring dreams of the future. (Prolonged applause.)

Our youth has many friends in all countries and we would
like to see among them ever-growing numbers of young Americans.
The difference in our ideologies should not prevent us from living
in peace, having sport-competitions and meeting each other at festi-
vals and on tourist routes.

We are not imposing our ideas on anyone, but we are firmly
convinced that our system is the most progressive and the most
humane in the world, and that the future belongs to it, and not to
capitalism. There is nothing that can shake this assurance in us!

The main thing which will not be obscured in us is our love
for the land of the Soviets, Soviet freedom, Soviet flag and Soviet
sun! (Prolonged applause.)

We have been reared in this spirit by the Communist Party
which opened for us broad horizons and gave us wings for daring
flights into the future. Learning today the fundamentals of science,
we students, like all Soviet youth, make our contribution to the ful-
fillment of the great plans mapped out by the Party.

We assure you, Nikita Sergeyevich, our own Party, and all
Soviet people, that we shall always and everywhere act as most loyal
and tireless fighters for the great cause of communism, as did Com-
munists, our fathers and older brothers. (Prolonged applause.)

Glory to our wise Communist Party! (Applause.)

May there be stronger friendship between Soviet youth and
youth of all countries in the struggle for peace! (Prolonged applause,)

The next to take the floor was N. S. Khrushchev. The participants of the
meeting, standing, greeted the head of the Soviet Government with stormy, pro-
longed applause.

SPEECH BY N. $. KHRUSHCHEV

DEAR COMRADES:

We have just stepped off the plane which made a nonstop
flight from Washington to Moscow. (Applause.) We have come
straight here to this meeting, dear Muscovites, in order to share our

217

impressions with you and to tell you about the results of our stay in
the United States of America, which we visited at the invitation of
President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

In accepting that invitation, we were prompted by the con-
sideration that the international situation and the relations between
our states our two Great Powers, the Soviet Union and the United
States have for a long time been strained. To preserve such a state
of affairs would mean to preserve a situation in which there may be
a)l kinds of surprises fraught with grave consequences for our peoples
and for the peoples of the whole world That is why the more far-
sighted statesmen in a number of countries have come to realize
the need to make some effort to put an end to the cold war, to
remove the tension in international relations, clear the atmosphere
and create more or less normal relations between states. The peoples
could then live and look to the future without fear. The Twentieth
Century is one in which human intellect and talent have attained
the greatest heights. In our day, the dreams mankind cherished for
ages, dreams expressed in fairy-tales which seemed sheer fantasy, are
being translated into reality by man's own hands. How, then, in this
age of flourishing human genius that is fathoming nature's secrets
and harnessing her mighty forces, can one reconcile oneself to the
preservation of the primitive relations between men that existed when
men were no more than beasts?

If such relations in the remote past may be explained by the
fact that man was still at the initial stage of his development and
little different from animals, then today, when man has reached such
heights of scientific knowledge and is step by step subduing the
forces of nature, compelling them to serve the needs of society
today there can be no justification for preserving the kind of relations
that existed among primitive men.

Our time can and must become the time of the triumph of great
ideals, the time of peace and progress. (Prolonged applause.)

The Soviet Government has long since perceived this. And that
is why we have repeatedly proposed to the Great Powers to organize
a meeting of the heads of government in order to exchange views on
urgent international issues. When we made these proposals, we be-
lieved in the power of human reason. We believed that, with a
rational approach, representatives of different political views, of
states with different social systems, could in the interests of peace,
find a common language in order to arrive at correct solutions to
the problems agitating all humanity today. In our age of tremendous

218

technological progress, in circumstances where there exist states with
different social systems, international problems can be successfully
solved only on the basis of the principles of peaceful coexistence.
There is no other way. Those who say that they do not understand
what peaceful coexistence is, and are afraid of it, are wittingly or
unwittingly helping to further the cold war whiclris bound to spread
unless we intervene and stop it It will reach a point of such intensity
that a spark may at any moment set off a world conflagration. In
that war much will perish. It will be too late to discuss what peaceful
coexistence means when such terrible means of destruction as atomic
and hydrogen bombs, and ballistic missiles, which practically cannot
be intercepted and can carry nuclear weapons to any point on the
globe, go into action. Not to reckon with this, means to close one's
eyes and stop one's ears, to hide one's head in the sand as the ostrich
does at the approach of danger. If we humans imitate the ostrich and
hide our head in the sand, then, I ask you, what is the use of having
a head if it is incapable of averting the danger to life? (Prolonged
applause.)

No, we must show human reason, we must have faith in the
human intellect, faith in the possibility of achieving agreement with
statesmen of different countries and in combining efforts^to mobilize
people for the task of averting the threat of war. We must have the
courage and determination to act in defiance of those who persist in
continuing the cold war. We must stop it from spreading, melt the
ice and normalize international relations.

From this lofty rostrum, before you Muscovites, before my whole
people, my government and Party, I must say that President Eisen-
hower displayed wise statesmanship in appraising the present world
situation, displayed courage and determination. (Stormy applause.)
Notwithstanding the complex situation prevailing in the United
States, the President, a man who enjoys the absolute confidence of
his people, proposed an exchange of visits between the heads of
government of our two countries. We give him due credit for this
important initiative aimed at strengthening the cause of peace.
(Prolonged applause.) In taking this step, he was confident that we
would accept the hand he proffered us, inasmuch as we have re-
peatedly addressed both President Eisenhower and other heads of
government to that effect And the President was not mistaken.
(Applause.)

Dear comrades, it gives me great satisfaction to report to you
that we have fulfilled part of our arrangement with President Eisen-

hower concerning the exchange of visits. At th6 Presidents kind invi-
tation we have visited the United States of America, where we have
had some important meetings and talks.

I would like to share with you my impressions of that visit and
to tell you briefly of its results. I believe it will be best to tell you
exactly what happened. The more candid our account, the better it
will be for strengthening relations between the peoples of our two
countries. (Applause.) It would not be true if I were to say that our
tour of some American cities, and our meetings and talks with many
Americans have ironed out all the controversial issues. Only a politi-
cally blind man could expect that whatever he says will be done.

No, in order to settle such important questions, one visit, one
trip is not enough. Much effort is required. It will take many more
meetings before complete mutual understanding is achieved, before
we reach the goal which our Party, our people and our Soviet Gov-
ernment have always pursuedto ensure peaceful coexistence be-
tween states with different social systems, and to safeguard the
security of the peoples on the basis of noninterference in internal
affairs.

I would like to tell you how we felt when we first set foot on
American soil.

Frankly speaking, rny own feelings were somewhat mixed. The
reason for this was that as soon as the first reports of the coming
exchange of visits appeared, many press organs and some United
States spokesmen launched a propaganda campaign against my com-
ing to the United States. The atmospheric conditions they created
did not warm me, although the temperature in the United States is
much higher than in Moscow. They wanted to meet me with a cold
shower. I was particularly disappointed when, hi the plane en route
from Moscow to Washington, I read a speech by Vice-President
Nixon timed to coincide with my arrival. He chose an audience
which could hardly be suspected of being bellicose. He was address-
ing an association of dentists. (Animation.) However, Mr. Nixon's
speech was far from medicinal in content (Laughter.) He, so to
speak, added a chill to the toothache. One would think he was afraid
of the atmosphere really turning warmer, of the cold war really
ending. I cannot understand why this was necessary.

However, when we arrived in Washington we were accorded a
reception worthy of our great country, our great people. (Prolonged,
stormy applause.) We must give due credit to President Eisenhower
for having done everything appropriate for a meeting at such a level.

220

(Applause.) You probably read the newspaper reports about the
reception in the U.S. capital and the President's speech on that occa-
sion. I shall not repeat all that It was a warm reception.

Shortly after our arrival in Washington, the President received
us at the White House. The Vice-President, Mr. Nixon, and the
Secretary of State, Mr. Herter, were present I am a rather restless,
straightforward sort of person, and although it may not have been
altogether diplomatic of me, I asked at our very first meeting why
the Vice-President had to make such a speech on the eve of my visit,
not to mention the unfriendly statements and articles by people of
lesser rank.

The President said he had not read Nixon's speech. I told him
he need not bother to read it, since it was already past history.
(Applause.)

This is a little detail that gives some idea of the preparations
made to meet the visitor from overseas. (Animation.)

Here is another. You Muscovites, and not only you, but all
Soviet people Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Uzbeks, Geor-
gians, Kazakhs, Armenians all our peoples alike, always give a guest
a proper welcome. No matter what country he may come from, what-
ever his political views, once he is our guest we put our bread and
salt on the table and show him not only formal, but sincere respect
(Applause.) Here is what I witnessed on my first day there, in the
United States: As we drove with the President through the streets
lined with crowds, I noticed that here and there someone would
raise his hand and wave, but the next moment the hand would drop
abruptly as though it had touched a live wire. (Laughter.)

I could not understand it at first And so I decided to look more
closely at the faces of the people lining the route. I began to nod to
them in greeting, and many of them nodded in response. Now what
was the trouble?

Later I was told that ten minutes before we drove through with
the President to the White House, an automobile had passed along
the route carrying a poster inscribed to the effect that the guest
should be met with dignity and politeness, but without applause or
greetings. (Animation.)

Afterwards I asked Mr. Lodge, the President's personal repre-
sentative accompanying me on my tour of the United States, whether
this was true, and was told that a car with such a poster had indeed
passed along the route, but whose car it was no one seemed to know.
(Laughter.) It was said to have broken through the police guard.

221

When I was given this explanation by official spokesmen, I told them
I could not imagine how the police, who were guarding me so well,
could have failed to notice a car carrying a poster of that sort
(Animation.)

I am convinced that the President knew nothing of all this and
that it was all done without the knowledge not only of the President
but of the others who organized our reception. But, as the saying
goes, you cannot take a word out of a song.

From the moment we set foot on American soil I was so well
guarded that it was quite impossible for me to come into contact
with rank-and-file Americans. Police protection developed into a sort
of house arrest (Animation.) I was driven around in a closed car,
so that I could catch glimpses of the people who came to greet us
only through the window. And the people greeted me, even though
they could not always see me.

I am far from suggesting that all the friendly feelings expressed
by the American people were addressed to me personally or even to
our communist ideology. By their greetings, the Americans were
telling us that they, like ourselves, stand for peace and friendship
between our peoples. (Stormy applause.)

I shall not give you a detailed account of all our meetings with
the Americans. You have no doubt read about them in the papers.
We spent some time in Washington, then in New York, where I had
the honor to submit on behalf of the Soviet Government from the
rostrum of the United Nations a plan for general and complete
disarmament. (Stormy applause.)

From New York we went to the West Coast of the United
States, to Los Angeles and San Francisco, and from there to the state
of Iowa, and to Pittsburgh, the big industrial center of Pennsylvania.
And, finally, we returned to Washington. It was quite an extensive
tour. We visited various parts of the United States, and met all sorts
of people. We had many very good meetings and frank talks. But
there were meetings of a different nature, too.

During the first half of our tour, we could not help noticing that
one and the same story was repeated each time. Speakers claimed
that I had once said that we would "bury the capitalists." At first I
patiently explained what I had actually said, that we would "bury
capitalism" in the sense that socialism would inevitably replace that
moribund social system, just as in its time capitalism had replaced
feudalism. But as time went on, I saw that the people who persisted
in repeating this sort of question did not really need any explana-

222

tions. They were pursuing a definite purpose, namely, to use the
communist bogey to frighten people who have only the vaguest
notion of what communism is.

At a reception in Los Angeles, at which the Mayor, who is no
worse than other mayors though perhaps less diplomatic, again began
to speak in this spirit, I felt compelled to speak my mind

I said to them: Do you intend to make an unfriendly demon-
stration in every city and at every gathering? Very well, if that is
how you are going to receive me, then, as the Russian proverb says,
"From the stranger's gate, the road home is straight" (. Applause.)
If you are not yet ripe for talks, if you haven't yet realized the need
of ending the cold war and fear its termination, if you want to go
on with it, we can wait. The wind isn't blowing in our faces either.
We have the patience to wait, and the wisdom. Our country is getting
along fine. Our people have more than once shown wisdom, strength
and determination, and such capacity to surmount difficulties that
they can stand up for their country and for the cause of peace.
(Prolonged applause.) They will be able to give a fitting answer if
the aggressive forces should try to probe us with their bayonets*
(Applause.)

I was obliged to start diplomatic negotiations on this score. I
asked Comrade Gromyko, our Minister of Foreign Affairs, to go and
tell Mr. Lodge, the President's representative accompanying me,
that unless the matter was rectified I could not continue my tour
and would be obliged to return to Washington, and thence to Moscow,

All this evidently had its effect. Mr. Lodge conveyed to me
through Gromyko that he advised me to continue with the program
and to go on to San Francisco and other cities, and that the local
authorities would see to it that this would not happen again.

I must tell you that the talks through Comrade Gromyko took
place at night, and when I woke up in the morning everything had
indeed changed. When we left Los Angeles for San Francisco, the
"handcuffs'* figuratively speaking, were removed and I was able to
get out of the train and talk to people. (Applause.) People shook my
hand and I theirs, and they applauded and smiled, exactly as
you Muscovites do when you meet a guest, because you are glad to
see him and wish to do your best to make him feel that he is welcome.
(Applause.)

When we arrived in San Francisco, the sun was shining, it was
a beautiful day, like our own summer day. The climate of this
wonderful city was quite different, the sun's rays warmed us, but

223

warmer still to us was the cordial, unconstrained reception we were
given. (Applause.)

We are very grateful to Mr. Christopher, the Mayor of San
Francisco, to Mr. Brown, Governor of California, to the people of
San Francisco, to all those who showed an understanding of our
visit a visit of peace and friendship between our nations, between
the peoples of all countries. (Applause.)

We were given every opportunity to meet and talk to ordinary
people. True, the physical possibilities were limited, but that was
due to the brevity of our visit To tell the truth, my suspicions con-
cerning the ill intentions of the local authorities were dispelled. We
at once established good contact with the inhabitants of that large
and beautiful city.

I want to make special mention of my meeting with the long-
shoremen. Mr. Bridges, the leader of the Pacific Longshoremen's
Union, invited me and my companions to come and talk to the
workers. That was a most cordial meeting. Among the longshoremen,
simple and sincere folk, I felt as if I were among our Soviet workers.
(Applause.) The greetings I conveyed to them on behalf of Soviet
workers were met with enthusiasm, and they asked me, in turn, to
convey their hearty greetings. (Stormy applause.)

I also recall our visit to the computer plant in San Jose, near
San Francisco. The manager of the plant, Mr. Watson, and the
employees gave us a warm welcome, and acquainted us in detail
with the complex production processes. The explanations were given
in Russian a mark of consideration which it is particularly pleasant
to note. The plant itself, the layout, and the organization of produc-
tion, made a good impressioa

I observed that one of the men who was showing us around the
plant spoke Russian with a Ukrainian accent and I asked him in
Ukrainian:

"What is your name?"

"Marchenko," he replied.

"Glad to meet you," I said "Are your parents living?"

"Yes," he answered.

"Give my regards to them."

He thanked me.

But our stay in hospitable San Francisco came to an end, and
we had to continue our journey by plane to another American city,
Des Moines, in the state of Iowa. Des Moines is one of the principal
agricultural centers of the United States.

224

After a cordial reception by the Governor of the state, the Mayor
of the city, and representatives of the business community and public
leaders, we drove out to the corn fields so dear to my heart (Ani-
mation, applause.) I must say that the Americans know how to grow
corn. It is planted everywhere in squares and the fields are in good
condition. True, there too, in the fields of the leading corn expert
himself, my old acquaintance Garst, I found a few shortcomings.
(Laughter, applause.) His corn was crowded in clusters, and I drew
his attention to that fact in a friendly way, of course.

We were shown great hospitality by our host, Mr. Garst, who
arranged an interesting meeting for us with the farmers. We met
Adlai Stevenson there the prominent Democratic Party leader who
had come from Chicago, and we had a most frank and friendly talk
with him.

I recall this episode. When we visited the local college, one of
the young people gave me a copy of the students' newspaper. It
contained a long article in which, I was told, the students welcomed
our arrival The article, however, said that the students would meet
us without enthusiasm or cheers. Yet those very students in whose
name the article had been written those lively, eager young people
showed exactly the same sort of enthusiasm as our own youth.
They shouted, and applauded, and expressed their feelings most
vociferously. I heard them shout: "Tovarishch Khrushchev!" "NikitaP
and other simple, friendly words. (Animation, applause.)

I must also tell you about the warm welcome we were given by
the inhabitants of Pittsburgh one of the biggest industrial centers
of America, the city of steel-makers and machine-builders. They
showed us great friendliness and respect. I even felt a trifle awkward
as I drove from the airfield. We arrived in Pittsburgh at midnight.
It was a dark night, yet all along the road people stood beside cars
and I saw their smiles and heard their words of welcome.

In Pittsburgh we visited the Mesta Company's machine plant
We felt that the plant management had done their best to show us
the plant and to enable us to acquaint ourselves with working condi-
tions. We went through the plant and talked with the workers. I
would like to mention one detail: When we first arrived we were
greeted, but with restraint However, the longer we were with the
workers, the warmer the atmosphere grew. The workers enthusiasti-
cally expressed their respect for us representatives of the Soviet state
and Soviet people.

I also remember the meeting I had with Pittsburgh businessmen

225

md intellectuals at the local university. There was the usual dinner
ind speeches, but speeches which seemed to me to display a more
ealistic understanding of the need for amicable relations between
>ur countries.

Hearing me speak now, some people may be thinking: Khrush-
rhev is speaking only of the friendly meetings, he says nothing about
he hostile demonstrations. No, I do not intend to hush up the fact
iiat there were instances of hostility and unfriendliness towards us.
es, there were such instances. I must tell you that just as the Amer-
can newspapermen accompanied me throughout my tour of the
United States, so did some fascist-minded refugees from different
:ountries, who went with us from town to town, parading a few
niserable posters. We also saw grim and morose American faces.

There was a great deal that was good, but one must not forget
:he bad either. The little worm, or rather the great big worm, is still
ilive and is liable to show its vitality in the future.

Why do I speak of this? Is it in order to cool relations between
the Soviet Union and the United States? No. I mention this because
it is necessary to know the truth, because you must see not only one
>ide, the pleasant side, but also the other, the backstage side which
should not be hidden. In America there are forces which are operat-
ing against us, which are against lessening tension and for preserving
the cold war. To close one's eyes to this fact would be to display
weakness in combating these evil forces, these evil spirits. No, they
must be dragged out into the open, exposed and publicly flogged,
they must be roasted like devils in a frying pan. (Laughter, prolonged
applause.) Let those who wish to continue the cold war fume. No
ordinary people anywhere in the world, no sensible human being will
support them. (Applause.)

Our visit to Pittsburgh rounded out our tour of the United
States.

In winding up my account of our tour I should like to express
Dur sincere thanks to the mayors of the towns and the governors of
the states we visited, to the representatives of the business world and
:o the intellectuals, to the personnel of the factories and universities,
:o workers and farmers, and to all the representatives of public organ-
zations. I particularly want to express my appreciation of all that
vas done for us by the Mayor of New York, Mr. Wagner; the Mayor
)f San Francisco, Mr. Christopher; the Mayor of Pittsburgh, Mr.
Gallagher; the Governor of Pennsylvania, Mr. David Lawrence; the
Chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh, Mr. Litchfield; the Presi-

226

dent of Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts, James
Hilton; the representatives of the business world Eric Johnston, Rob-
ert Bowling, Cyrus Eaton, Thomas Watson, Frank Mesta, Roswell
Garst; and others. (Applause.)

The numerous gifts we received were a splendid token of respect
for our country and for its great people. The Mayors of New York
and Pittsburgh presented us with a medallion of New York and the
key of Pittsburgh.

I said, by the way, that I was accepting the key as a symbol
of trust, "And you can rest assured," I said, "I promise you, that this
key will never be used without the hosts' permission.** (Prolonged
applause.)

International Harvester Company presented us with a film
dealing with the mechanization of corn production; President Eisen-
hower gave a pedigree heifer from his private farm; Admiral Strauss,
a steer and a heifer; and farmer Coolidge, a pedigree hog. Many other
gifts were presented, for which we are grateful and appreciative.
(Applause.)

I would like to say that the American press, radio and television
gave extensive, and on the whole correct, objective coverage of our
visit to the United States. There were, of course, some unfriendly
attacks on the part of individual journalists, but it was not they who
set the tone in the American press.

My comrades and I were accompanied on our tour of the United
States by the President's personal representative, Mr. Lodge; Mr.
Buchanan, Chief of the Protocol Division of the State Department;
Mr. Thompson, U.S. Ambassador to the USSR; their wives; and
other officials. I would like to thank them all, and especially Mr.
Lodge. He did his best to create the necessary conditions for us on
our tour and to acquaint us with the life of the great American
people. (Applause.)

I remarked in jest to Mr. Lodge that if he, a representative of
the capitalist world, and I, a representative of the working class and
the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, were to be cast away on a
desert island, we would probably find a common language and would
be able to coexist peacefully. (Animation, prolonged applause.) Why
could not states with different social systems coexist? Our countries
are also on an island, as it were; after all, with modern means of
communication which have brought continents closer together, our
earth indeed seems like a small island, and we ought to realize that
And once the need for coexistence is realized, it is necessary to pur-

227

sue a peaceful policy, to live in friendship and not to brandish weap-
ons but to destroy them. (Applause.)

Comrades, on September 25 I met the President again in the
White House and together we flew by helicopter to Camp David, his
country residence. We spent September 25, 26 and 27 there. We held
frank and friendly talks, set forth the positions of our governments
on vital international issues and also on questions of improving
Soviet-American relations. Mr. Herter, the U.S. Secretary of State,
and Comrade Gromyko, the USSR Foreign Minister, as well as other
comrades in my party took part in these meetings and talks and did
useful work.

The principal result of our exchange of opinions is given in the
joint communique which has been published today in the press. There
can be no doubt that this document will be received with satisfaction
by all who are interested in strengthening peace. (Prolonged
applause.)

It should be borne in mind, however, that naturally the President
and I could not at one sitting clear away all the accretions of the
cold war that have piled up in the course of many years. It will take
time to sweep away that rubbish and, not only to sweep it away, but
to grind it to dust Certain things that divide us are still too fresh.
It is sometimes difficult for some leaders to discard old positions,
old views, old definitions.

But I can tell you in all frankness, dear comrades, that as a
result of my talks and discussions of concrete questions with the
U.S. President, I have gained the impression that he sincerely wishes
to see the end of the cold war, to create normal relations between
our countries and to help improve relations among all countries.
(Stormy applause.) Peace today is indivisible, it cannot be secured
by the efforts of two or three countries alone. Hence it is necessary
that all nations, all states participate in the fight for peace.

The President and I exchanged views on the question of dis-
armament He stated that the Government of the United States was
studying our proposal and that the United States, like ourselves,
wants total, controlled disarmament

It would seem that there are, at present, no reasons for delaying
settlement of this question. But, on the other hand, disarmament is
too serious a question for one to expect one's partners to settle it
hastily, right off the bat It must, of course, be studied with a view
to finding a solution that would really create confidence and ensure
disarmament and the peaceful coexistence of states.

228

So let us not be hasty in our judgement, let us be patient and
give the statesmen time to study our proposals. But we will not be
idle, we shall continue to urge the need for complete and general
disarmament. (Applause.) We regard our proposals as a basis for
agreement We are prepared to discuss any amendments to our
documents, to our proposals. We are prepared to discuss any other
proposals that may be made if they are directed towards the same
aims as those we pursue.

The President and I also exchanged views on the German
question, on the question of concluding a peace treaty. We tried to
show him, and I believe we succeeded, that our proposals for a peace
treaty had been incorrectly interpreted in the West Some people
had sought to whip up undue passions by claiming that this was an
ultimatum, and so on. Those who did so were clearly prompted by a
desire to prolong the cold war. They went so far as to declare that
our proposals for a peace treaty with Germany were little short of
a declaration of war. To think that anyone could distort the peaceful
stand of the Soviet Union in such a fashion!

We also exchanged views, on holding a meeting of heads of
government We both outlined the positions of our governments and
agreed that such a meeting is necessary and useful

We exchanged opinions on the date of President Eisenhower's
return visit to the Soviet Union. At first the President intended to
come to the USSR in the latter part of October. However, he asked
me what time of the year was best for touring our country. That
made me think We Muscovites like Moscow at all seasons of the
year. But, like all people, we find spring, the season of joy when
nature awakens to life, pleasantest And so I said that it would per-
haps be best if he came later in May or early in June. And it would
be good if the President would bring along his wife, his son and
daughter-in-law, and his grandchildren. We would also be glad to see the
President's brother, who has been to our country with Mr. Nixon.

The President was kind enough to invite me to his farm. He
showed me his com I couldn't very well visit the President without
having a look at his corn, could I? (Animation.) He showed me his
calves and his steers. Fine animals. True, I must say that the Eisen-
hower farm is rather small for the President of such a huge and
wealthy state. It is not a rich farm and the soil is not very good
But the President said that he wants to work to improve the land
and thereby leave behind a good memory of himself.

229

At the farm I met the President's grandchildren and had a con-
ference with them. (Laughter.) I asked them if they would like to
go to Russia And all of them, from the youngest to the eldest, de-
clared that they wanted to go to Russia, to Moscow. The eldest
grandson is eleven, the youngest granddaughter is three or four.
I won their support. I remarked jokingly to the President that it was
easier to agree on a return visit with his grandchildren than with
himself (laughter, applause), because his grandchildren have a good
environment, whereas he evidently has some obstacles to contend
with which prevent him from realizing his wishes as and when he
wants to. (Applause.)

I would like to tell you, dear comrades, that I have no doubt
that the President is prepared to exert his efforts and his will to bring
about agreement between our countries, to create friendly relations
between our two peoples and to settle pressing problems in the in-
terest of a durable peace. (Applause.)

At the same time, it is my impression that there are forces in
America which are not operating in the same direction as the Presi-
dent These forces stand for continuing the cold war and the arms
race. Whether these forces are great or small, influential or uninflu-
ential, whether the forces backing the President and he has the
support of the absolute majority of the American people can win,
are questions I would not be too hasty to answer.

Time is a good counsellor, or as the Russians say: "The morning
is wiser than the evening." That is a wise dictum. Let us wait until
morning, the more so since we have arrived by plane at the end of
the day and it is now evening as I speak here. And perhaps more
than one morning will pass before we will be able to tell for sure.
But we shall not sit with our arms folded and wait for the dawn,
wait to see which way the arrow of international relations will point

We, for our part, will do everything we can to ensure that the
barometer points not to "storms" or even to "change," but to "fair."
(Prolonged applause.)

I am confident, comrades, that in the present circumstances,
when the forces of peace have grown immeasurably, when the socialist
camp numbers nearly one billion people and possesses enormous
productive capacities, when the Soviet Union has such vast achieve-
ments in industry and agriculture, science, engineering and culture-
we can do a great deal for peace.

In our actions we base ourselves on reason, on truth, on the
support of the whole people. Moreover, we rely on our mighty poten-

230

tiaL And those who wish to preserve the cold war with a view sooner
or later to turning it into a hot war had best know that in our time
only a madman can start war, who himself will perish in its flames.
(Applause.)

The peoples must strait-jacket such madmen. We believe that
statesmanship, that human reason will triumph. (Applause.) In the
splendid words of Pushkin, "Let reason triumph! May darkness be
banished!" (Prolonged applause.)

Dear comrade Muscovites! We are boundlessly happy to be
home again, to see the dear faces of Soviet people. (Applause.)

Long live the great Soviet people who are successfully building
communism under the leadership of the glorious Party of Lenin!
(Prolonged applause.)

Long live Soviet- American friendship! (Prolonged applause.)

Long live friendship among all the peoples of the world!
(Stormy, prolonged applause. All rise.)

A standing ovation greeted the end of the speech made by the head of the
Soviet Government. Nikita Sergeyevich went over to E. L. Freers, Charge
d' Affaires ad interim of the United States in the USSR and shook his hand. A
burst of applause once more broke out in the hall.

The meeting was declared closed, and the majestic strains of the national
anthem of the Soviet Union filled the hall. For a long time the audience remained
in the hall, warmly applauding N. S. Khrushchev.

231

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "KHRUSHCHEV IN AMERICA"

See other formats